Freedom-to-operate (FTO) opinion redaction is the removal of personal data from a legal opinion. The opinion is usually privileged — CDPA 1988 s.280 extends privilege to communications with a patent attorney — so where it goes matters as much as what it says. anonym.plus runs offline and keeps the s.60 infringement reasoning that holds the value.
When this applies
An FTO opinion names the client, the author, and the reviewed parties. To share the analysis as a sample, hide those personal details first.
How anonym.plus handles it
- Bring the opinion into anonym.plus on your device.
- The tool finds client, counsel, and party names.
- The risk analysis and reasoning stay in place.
- Swap them so the document still reads well.
- Save the clean copy on your device.
What you need to provide
- The opinion (DOCX, PDF, or scan).
- An operator; Replace keeps the analysis readable.
- Optional role map for [CLIENT] / [COUNSEL] labels.
PII entity types detected
| Category | anonym.plus entity type | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Names | PERSON | Client R. Marek → [CLIENT] |
| Names | PERSON | Counsel Dr. Lindqvist → [COUNSEL] |
| Org | ORGANIZATION | competitor Acme → [PARTY] |
| Reference | PATENT_NUMBER | GB2571022 → [PATENT_NO] |
| Contact | EMAIL_ADDRESS | fto@example.co.uk → [EMAIL] |
| Dates | DATE_TIME | dated 04/2026 → [DATE] |
Compliance achieved
- Keeps readable the claim-scope analysis that infringement under Patents Act 1977 s.60 turns on.
- Preserves patent attorney privilege under CDPA 1988 s.280, and its trade mark equivalent in TMA 1994 s.87.
- Supports the legal advice privilege test in Three Rivers (No 6) [2004] UKHL 48 by keeping the opinion in-house.
- Flags that an opinion sent outside can become a threat actionable under Patents Act 1977 s.70A, inserted by the Intellectual Property (Unjustified Threats) Act 2017.
- Runs offline — no cloud exposure of legal opinions.
Anonymise FTO opinions offline — see plans & start free →
Limitations & cautions
An opinion can be privileged, so local work helps keep that protection. Patent numbers and competitor names can re-link the analysis to a known matter. Swap them too for a fully blinded sample.
Frequently asked questions
Does local work protect privilege?
Keeping the file on your own device avoids handing it to a third party. That helps preserve legal advice privilege on the Three Rivers (No 6) [2004] UKHL 48 test, and the patent attorney privilege given by CDPA 1988 s.280.
Can I keep the legal reasoning?
Yes. The risk analysis and reasoning stay. Only client, counsel, and party IDs change.
Are reviewed patent numbers removed?
By default they are flagged as references. Swap them if a number could re-link the sample to a known matter.