I’ve been using Google’s NotebookLM to help me complete my long-delayed book on Patent Litigation.

NotebookLM is a RAG (retrieval augmented generation) system that Google developed with Steven Johnson, well-known author of books on invention and innovation.

You can upload documents to NotebookLM — or, more recently, provide it links to your docs on Google Drive or on websites — and NotebookLM will use your constrained collection of documents as the basis for new AI-generated documents, and for chats. Each doc will automatically be summarized, as will  the entire collection. You can also generate other materials, such as a study guide, briefing doc, FAQ, and timeline. [Later, describe how different from doing within Google Drive with Google’s Gemini LLM, or from using a project in Anthropic Claude.]

Among the most interesting automatically-generated output are an “Audio Overview” and a “Mind Map”.

From my 36 linked files (“Sources” in NotebookLM), many of which contained very rough bullet-pointed notes to self, it generated a 21-minute audio conversation between two synthetic characters, who might sound like clueless marketing folks, but who have been given a very good script to follow:

https://notebooklm.google.com/notebook/811dfa64-7bb8-430a-ac60-42a62315ea49/audio 

I’m ashamed to say that these two fictional characters do a better job of summarizing key points and nuances of my forthcoming book than I’ve been able to do myself. [List 2 or 3 nuances captured.] The audio generation appears to be greatly improved when from I last tried this in Nov. 2024.

See a transcript of the NotebookLM-generated audio, with my comments and clarifications, and highlighting a few places where I thought NotebookLM did especially well, making some of my key points better than I did. I tried the audio beta “Interactive mode” to correct a small error, but it seemed to get the two speakers unnecessarily sidetracked. (By the way, it’s slightly awkward to get a text transcript of the audio within NotebookLM: you designate the audio file as a new source, and then clicking on it within the left-hand Source panel will reveal the transcript.)

NotebookLM also provided a MindMap of my notes for the Patent Litigation book, part of which is shown below, expanding some of the higher-level locations in the map:

Again, this was generated by NotebookLM with no involvement from me other than providing links to my docs (which of course I had to write, over several years), and pressing the “MindMap” button. As author of the underlying docs, I not only feel this automatically-generated map is accurate, and fairly complete (though I would be shocked if there isn’t something important missing, or something that’s been given too much or too little emphasis), but also useful in thinking how to whip all my docs (some of which are just rough outlines with phrases and sentence fragments) into a coherent table of contents, from which I could finish writing the darn book. Drilling into the Incentives/Policy branch of the MindMap:

NotebookLM generated a “Comprehensive Briefing” on the entire project. See NotebookLM-generated “comprehensive briefing” on rough notes for “Patent Litigation” book with extensive comments on the NBLM-generated briefing doc, including comparison to the underlying rough materials I provided, and a discussion of LLM/RAG summarization abilities generally.

[Next, I’ll be providing NotebookLM’s summaries of some of my individual docs. It’s probably premature to link to my rough docs themselves, but I’ll provide commentary on what NotebookLM got right and wrong. We’ll then get into some chats I had with NotebookLM about where in my mass of notes I have material on this or that topic.]

Chatbook (using Google NotebookLM) for Patent Litigation book by Andrew Schulman

• This shared NotebookLM provides chat based on my extensive notes for a forthcoming book on Patent Litigation.
• https://notebooklm.google.com/notebook/811dfa64-7bb8-430a-ac60-42a62315ea49/preview
• Try asking something like “What are underlying purposes for claim charts?”, “How does collateral estoppel apply to patent invalidity?”, “Whats the book say about discovery during litigation?”, or “What are key cases on claim chart acceptability?”, or “The book seems to have a lot from scholars like romer, scotchmer, mokyr, jones, simon. What’s all that doing in a book on claim charts, source code, reverse engineering, etc.?”
• Once you start a chat, NotebookLM will suggest related follow-up questions.
• Or ask “What is the table of contents for the book?”, scan the reply for topics of interest, and then ask follow-up like “Give me a more detailed outline of chapter 5” (and keep in mind this is based on rough notes which are sometimes very rough), or “Drill down into the subsection titled “Claim Evolution and the Point of Novelty (PON)”
• Or ask it, “What are 10 questions, specifically about patent litigation, that I can ask here?”; one possible reply you’ll receive (at least if you first configure chat settings for “Analyst” and for shorter answers):
  • “I can assist you as a thought partner by navigating the provided knowledge base on patent litigation, which includes detailed information on patent claims, limitations, infringement, invalidity, claim charts, Local Patent Rules, discovery, expert witnesses, and the strategic and economic aspects of patent disputes. I can help you quickly understand complex topics, find specific facts, apply relevant frameworks, and formulate well-supported recommendations. Here are 10 questions specifically about patent litigation that you can ask:
    1. What are the primary purposes of claim charts in patent litigation?
    2. How do patent claims and their “limitations” define the boundaries of a patented invention within litigation?
    3. What is “literal infringement,” and how does it differ from infringement under the “Doctrine of Equivalents” (DoE)?
    4. What are the primary grounds for challenging the “validity” of a patent in litigation, even after it has been granted by the PTO?
    5. How does “claim construction” (Markman hearing) impact the course and potential outcome of patent litigation?
    6. What are the requirements for “plausibility” and “reasonable pre-filing investigation” when a patent owner initiates an infringement lawsuit?
    7. What role do expert witnesses play in patent litigation, particularly concerning technical facts and infringement/invalidity analysis?
    8. How do Local Patent Rules (LPRs) influence the procedural requirements for infringement and invalidity contentions in federal district courts?
    9. What is the “multiplicity problem” in patent litigation, and what challenges does it present for litigants?
    10. What are the various private goals that motivate patent owners to engage in patent litigation, beyond simply protecting their products?
    To continue, we could start by delving into any of these questions, or you might want to explore how the strategic landscape of patent disputes impacts these individual aspects.”
• There is also a ChatGPT version of the Patent Litigation chatbook: https://chatgpt.com/share/68be1320-b1f8-8013-b06f-3cf43a2f0130 — it is not as seamless as the NotebookLM version (it shows names of my private files used as basis for the chat, but the chat itself works).
• No Claude version yet, because when generating a public shared Claude chat, it doesn’t yet allow providing chat over uploaded docs (RAG) without also providing access to the underlying docs. They now have “Claude-powered artifacts”, which sounds perfect, except a current limitation is “No persistent storage”, so I would need to have Claude put all my docs right inline inside the Python it would generate for the artifact, which seems brittle.
• My son Matthew asked “In layman’s terms, and about 5 sentences, what’s this book about?”, and with chatbot “temperature” randomizing, one of course gets a different answer each time; for example, repeated asking of the ChatGPT version of the chatbook:
  • In plain terms, the book is about what happens after a patent is granted. Instead of focusing on how to get a patent, it looks at lawsuits where companies (or universities, or individuals) accuse others of using their patented technology without permission. The central idea is that patents are made up of “claims,” which are like detailed recipes or parts lists, and lawsuits turn on whether an accused product matches every detail of one of those claims. The book explains how courts and experts go through those nitty-gritty details, how defendants push back by trying to show the patent is invalid, and how damages—sometimes in the billions—get calculated. Along the way, it asks the bigger policy question: why do we let people turn a few words, formulas, or diagrams into legal weapons worth enormous sums of money? Ultimately, it argues that while messy and often frustrating, patent litigation is central to how the U.S. patent system tries to “promote the progress of the useful arts”.
  • In simple terms, this book is about what happens when patents turn into lawsuits. It explains how patents aren’t just ideas, but bundles of very precise “claims,” and whether a company infringes depends on whether its product matches every detail of those claims. It shows how courts, lawyers, and experts pick apart those words, how defendants fight back by trying to knock patents out as invalid, and how damage awards can soar into the millions or billions. Alongside the courtroom battles, the book also looks at the bigger picture—whether this system really helps or hurts innovation, investment, and progress. In the end, it’s about why these dry legal documents can spark high-stakes conflicts that shape entire industries.
  • This book is about what happens when patents—those legal rights to inventions—end up in court. It explains how the fine print of a patent, especially the “claims” that define exactly what’s protected, can become the battlefield in lawsuits worth millions or even billions. It shows how lawyers, judges, and technical experts argue over whether a product really uses what a patent covers, or whether the patent itself should never have been granted. Beyond the courtroom drama, it also asks whether these fights truly encourage new ideas and investment, or whether they sometimes slow progress down. In short, it’s about how a few lines of legal text can reshape entire industries.