Consensus and Replication Protocol Patents: Filing Trends and Leaders
82.8% concentration. The top 5 of 30 ranked assignees account for 341 of 412 records in scope — filing here is dominated by a small group, not a fragmented field. Filings rose to a peak of 63 in 2019, then eased; the 2021-to-2024 span shows a documented -18% shift (56 to 46), and 2025-2026 figures are still incomplete due to publication lag.
- 1PURE STORAGE INC215
- 2CIRATA INC40
- 3NETAPP INC40
- 4MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY LICENSING LLC27
- 5JUNIPER NETWORKS INC19
See the full consensus and replication protocols analysis in Eureka
- The complete ranking, not just the top five
- Every IPC branch with its share of the corpus
- The most-cited records, and where claim space is still thin
Common questions
Who holds the most patents in consensus and replication protocols?
One assignee leads the ranked field with 215 of the 412 records in scope, well ahead of the fifth-ranked assignee at 19 records and the tenth-ranked at 4. The top 5 of the 30 ranked assignees together hold 82.8% of all records, and the top 10 hold 91.3%. This means the field is concentrated among a small number of holders rather than spread evenly across many filers.
Is patent filing in this area growing or slowing down?
Filing peaked in 2019 at 63 records and has since eased on a complete-year basis, with the 2021-to-2024 comparison showing a documented -18% shift from 56 to 46 filings. Figures for 2025 and 2026 are still incomplete because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so they should not yet be read as continued decline. The honest read is a cooling trend through 2024, with the most recent two years still filling in.
What technology areas do these patents actually cover?
The overwhelming majority, 87.6% of the 412 records, carry an IPC classification in G06F, covering electric digital data processing — the core logic of consensus and replication. H04L, digital information transmission, appears in 28.2% of records, reflecting the networking layer beneath replication traffic. Smaller subclasses such as G06Q, G06N, G06K, G07C, H03K, and H04N each cover under 5% of records and mark narrower, more specialised claim territory.
Disclaimer. This analysis is based on Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent records and is provided for general information and reference only. Patent data carries inherent limitations — recent filings are under-counted because of publication lag, counts may be on a record or family basis, classification and applicant-name data may contain errors or duplicates, and the underlying search query defines the scope shown — so the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing here is an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Verify independently and review with qualified patent and legal professionals before acting on it.
Method: Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Consensus and Replication Protocols covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish. Every share divides by all records in scope. Data: Patsnap Eureka. See the full landscape report.