Skip to content
TÜRKPATENT Agent No.188 / 1670352 222 05 02
Asil Patent ve Danışmanlık — TÜRKPATENT Marka Sicili 188 · Patent Sicili 167
Book Appointment

⌗ patent

Utility Model or Patent? A Decision Tree for Your R&D Centre

If your R&D output has weak inventive step, the utility model offers 10-year protection + lower fees + a faster process. A 7-question decision tree + example cases.

Is every invention coming out of your R&D centre patentable? No. Some are better suited to a utility model, and some fall outside any protection class. This article presents the practical decision matrix under SMK 6769.

Three quick questions

  1. Is your invention a method (process) or a chemical substance? → Only a patent. The utility model does not cover these categories.

  2. Is the inventive step strict or simply a "good variation"? → Strict = patent. Good variation = utility model.

  3. Speed-to-market or long protection? → Speed = utility model (1–2 years). Long protection + strong right = patent (20 years).

Full decision tree: Patent Eligibility Test →

Table

CriterionPatentUtility Model
Protection20 years10 years (non-extendable)
Inventive-step requirementNot obvious (strict)Non-trivial (flexible)
ScopeProduct + method + chemicalProduct only
Process2–4 years1–2 years
FeesHigh (incl. annuities)Low
RenewalNone (20-year flat)None (10-year flat)
TÜBİTAK support1602 dedicated quotaStandard 1507/1501
PCT routeAvailableNone (limited national filings)

Case 1 — Furniture OSB

A furniture maker developed a more robust mounting module for an existing chair-frame design. The inventive step was too weak for a patent (not difficult for a person skilled in the art) but novelty was present. Registered as a utility model in 14 months; 10 years' protection sufficient.

Case 2 — Software + hardware

An Ankara startup integrated a signal-processing algorithm into a new hardware-control system. Pure software is outside patentability, but the component carrying technical effect is patentable. Patent application filed + parallel software copyright protection.

Case 3 — Method invention

A Kayseri R&D centre developed a new control method on a food-processing line. A method is not eligible for a utility model — only the patent route is open. Patent filed, PCT used to reserve international protection.

Case 4 — Chemical composition

A textile firm developed a new fabric-finishing composition. A chemical substance is not eligible for a utility model — only a patent. The novelty search returned a similar German patent; however, the client's composition was a different chemical combination. The patent was secured intact.

Parallel strategy

In practice some files use a parallel filing:

  1. Utility model for fast protection (1–2 years)
  2. Patent application for an improved version of the same invention (2–4 years)

This approach is optimal for MVP-stage or pre-Series A startups — fast protection + a long-term structure for investors.

Cost split

Patent:

  • Filing fee: annual schedule (Official Gazette)
  • Annuities: increasing from year 3 onwards
  • Attorney fee: high (specification is complex)
  • TÜBİTAK 1602 reimbursement available

Utility model:

  • Filing fee: low
  • No annual annuities (single fee over 10 years)
  • Attorney fee: moderate
  • Compatible with TÜBİTAK 1507

Decision-tree check

Patent Eligibility Test → — see which route your invention fits in 7 questions.

Sources

  1. SMK No. 6769 arts. 82-90 (patents)
  2. SMK No. 6769 arts. 142-149 (utility models)

Author: Salih Aksebzeci · TÜRKPATENT Agent Registry No. 188 · Published: 2026-05-07