If you're going to be doing a master's degree by research, then admissions committees are going to want to see evidence of any previous research that you've done. That way, you're less of a risk for them to admit you, because you've already learned many of the skills you'll need to be successful.
The "currency" for establishing this are patents and research publications. I assume you're familiar with patents, since you ask for a comparison. Basically, research publications will be considered at least as important as patents, as they generally represent a significant amount of original research. (Patents may be a matter of development rather than research.)
As for how and where to release research publications, that depends on your field. In CS, my understanding is that generally means that you have to publish your research in conference papers, which means that you'll have to get your research work written up and submitted to a conference. Then you'll need to get your paper accepted, and then you can publish.
If you don't have any publications, don't worry. If you still have research experience, a recommendation letter from a research supervisor can also help to establish your qualifications. (Absent some evidence, though, most graduate programs will remain skeptical.)