# Prepare Ip Disclosure Schedule > Guides preparation of the IP disclosure schedule sub-sections for a company acquisition where owned IP, licenses, open-source software, claims, and employee or contractor IP assignment must be sourced from diligence materials. - Skill: `finchipaiorg/prepare-ip-disclosure-schedule` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add finchipaiorg/prepare-ip-disclosure-schedule` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/finchipaiorg/prepare-ip-disclosure-schedule/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Coding & Dev Tools - Author: FinchipAIOrg (https://skillmd.com/u/finchipaiorg) - Updated: 2026-09-22 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/finchipaiorg/prepare-ip-disclosure-schedule --- # Skill: IP Representation Disclosure Schedule Preparation ## 1. Subject-matter triage (only if applicable) - Confirm the disclosure schedule is the primary deliverable and draft the schedule itself first; do not stop at notes, issue lists, or a summary. - Identify the operative IP representation and map each sub-schedule to the specific exception category it is meant to support. - Build the schedule from source materials only; if a category is not supported by the record, state that it is not disclosed based on the materials reviewed rather than inferring completeness. - Treat the schedule as a disclosure artifact, not a diligence memo: the output should read like transactional schedule language with targeted practitioner notes where remediation is needed. ## 2. Failure modes the skill is correcting - Sub-schedules are populated from an IP inventory without cross-referencing diligence materials that may identify items requiring disclosure as exceptions to the representation. - The open-source schedule omits components that appear in software inventory materials but were not identified in the IP inventory, creating an incomplete disclosure of open-source obligations. - Known IP claims and disputes, including demand letters or similar correspondence, are not included in the relevant sub-schedule, which is the operative exception to the no-claims representation. - Practitioner notes on remediation items are omitted, leaving the deal team without guidance on which disclosed items require pre-closing action such as assignment cleanup, license cleanup, or lien release. - Multiple categories are collapsed into a single narrative, obscuring which disclosure supports which exception and making cross-references unusable. - Entries are presented as conclusions without tying them back to source documents, which makes the schedule hard to defend in a transaction review. - Remediation items are identified but not paired with a concrete action or responsible party, leaving the disclosure incomplete for deal execution. ## 3. Legal frameworks / domain conventions that apply - IP disclosure schedules in technology-company acquisitions are typically organized by owned registered and applied-for IP, material outbound and inbound licenses, open-source use, IP claims and threats, ownership and inventorship issues, employee and contractor assignment coverage, and liens or encumbrances. - The schedule should track the representation’s exception structure: each disclosed item should be placed in the sub-schedule that corresponds to the specific promise being qualified. - Personnel IP assignment coverage generally turns on whether confidentiality and invention-assignment agreements, or functional equivalents, cover all relevant personnel who created or contributed to the company’s IP. - Open-source compliance is conventionally disclosed by component, license type, product or codebase impact, and any license terms that may create distribution or source-release obligations. - IP liens and security interests are ordinarily disclosed as encumbrances and, where relevant, paired with payoff or release steps tied to the transaction closing. - External IP claims, including threats, demands, cease-and-desist letters, or litigation, are disclosed as exceptions to the no-claims representation and should identify the assertion, the counterparty, and the affected asset or product. - Cross-references should point to the related schedule entry that captures the same fact from another angle, rather than duplicating the same narrative in full. - Practitioner notes are not mere commentary; they should identify the cleanup step, the person or team responsible, and the transaction timing that makes the step necessary. ## 4. Analytical scaffolds - Review the SPA IP representation and identify each sub-schedule it expects; mirror that structure in the draft. - Review the IP inventory and separate owned IP by category, registration status, and materiality as reflected in the source set. - Review inbound and outbound license summaries and place each material arrangement in the correct licensing sub-schedule. - Review software inventory materials and identify any open-source components, license obligations, or codebase dependencies that should be disclosed. - Review personnel and contractor assignment records and identify any gaps, missing signatures, or legacy agreements that create an exception. - Review litigation, claims, demand letters, and threat correspondence and disclose each matter in the claims sub-schedule. - Review payoff, lien, and financing materials to identify any security interests or release obligations affecting IP. - For each disclosed item, ask four questions in order: what is it, which representation does it qualify, what source document supports it, and what remediation or follow-up is required. - When more than one item fits a sub-schedule, enumerate the items explicitly and draft each entry separately rather than blending them into one paragraph. - Use practitioner notes only for items that need action; do not add commentary to clean items unless needed to explain a cross-reference or qualification. ## 5. Vertical / structural / temporal relationships (only if applicable) - Organize each sub-schedule so the most transaction-sensitive items appear before ancillary disclosures within that category. - Keep related items linked across sub-schedules when the same fact has both ownership and compliance implications, such as a software component that is both licensed-in and open-source. - Distinguish historical facts from current obligations and closing-time actions; if the source materials show an issue that can be cured, note both the current disclosure and the expected closing-step remediation. - Where an item depends on another document or condition, state that relationship plainly in the entry so the reader can see what must happen before closing. - Use cross-references to show vertical dependencies, such as an assignment gap that also affects ownership, or a lien that also appears in debt payoff materials. ## 6. Output structure conventions - Produce a completed disclosure schedule in conventional transaction form, with sub-schedules corresponding to the IP representation’s components. - Each entry should identify the disclosed item, the supporting source material by reference, and any necessary cross-reference to another schedule or exhibit. - Include practitioner notes inline for remediation items, using concise language that states the issue, the needed fix, and the timing of the fix. - If a sub-schedule has no responsive items based on the source materials, state that expressly rather than leaving the section blank. - Keep the writing style transactional and schedule-like, not memo-like. - Use plain-text conventions that will survive export to .docx; do not rely on formatting alone to communicate whether an item is disclosed, cross-referenced, or requires action. - The primary deliverable must be the completed disclosure schedule file; any ancillary notes are secondary and should not displace the schedule itself.