Does Microsoft's settlement fever signal IP offensive?

TalkBack 25 of 33:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

No one is looking at the real downside of software patents.

It occurs to me there is another down side to software patents that no one is paying attention to. And that is, desire for patentable processes/applications/file storage/etc. is becoming the steering force in software.

By that I mean R&D becomes very out of balance and favors only areas of development where patenting is possible. Fixing flaws, improving the GUI, or general improvements in function provide little that is patentable so,,, why spend resources there? Indeed we could speculate that unneeded complexity is also brought into software in order to use something simply because there is a patent on it.

Would it not be possible to say, come up with a very complex schema for XML and then patent it and use it in all your applications? (Needed or not.) Couldn't you find some way to patent the communications between hardware components so no one could make or sell replacements other than the OEM?

My point is that the software patent laws, and the vast amounts of money they may represent if you picked the right patent (Sounds like the lottery doesn't it?) are drastically changing the "why" in software creation. To understand what that means take a look at the drug industry and how it's influenced by the desire to be the sole supplier of some thing/ any thing. Popular designer drugs are the rage (just watch a few TV commercials) while research into real medical needs are ignored. Anyone that has had to buy meds for whatever reason knows exactly what I am talking about when I say the drug industry is a perfect example of IP gone wild.

Claims of competition in the drug industry are bogus in that they, via patents, stake out certain areas and own it until they no longer can or it becomes unprofitable. The only competition you will see is when someone finds a cash cow like Viagra. Then everyone (the big guys) finds a way to jump on board by skirting the patent or buying the rights or cross license, or some other vehicle not open to the small guys.

It appears to me that software is now following the same path, generating ownable IP has become more important than what is being produced. Unfortunately open source tends to follow/lead/compete in the same areas the large IP owners define as the market, so there is little software from them that isn't pretty much main stream. In other words, they aren't taking the less traveled road either. (Yes I understand why, but that doesn't change it.)

The fact of the matter is, software patents are broken, they need to be fixed not thrown out, and most of all they need to reflect the purpose for which they were created and that is to spur innovation and investment in innovation. Otherwise, we can sit and watch the drug company scenario all over again.

Posted by: No_Ax_to_Grind   Posted on: 11/09/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Spotlight On Messaging ScriptLogic Spotlight on Messaging optimizes the performance and availability of ... Download Now
• Security Explorer for Exchange Version 7.0.2 ScriptLogic Security Explorer for Exchange is a powerful, graphical solution for ... Download Now
• New College Durham Attracts New Students With Robust IT Infrastructure Delivered With the Help of Dell Professional Services Dell When New College Durham received funding from the Learning Skills Council ... Download Now