Gnoso

I have long held the belief that software patents are a bad idea. Brad Feld has recently asked for help on his blog with the End Software Patents Coalition, and I agree wholeheartedly.

1. Software changes so rapidly that by the time you get a patent (2+ years from filing), your need for patent protection is quite possibly gone.
2. The timeframes for patents are way too long for software.  By the time a patent expires, a software invention is most likely dead and replaced by new innovations.
3. For the most part, it does not take huge capital investments to generate software innovation.  Thus the need for patent protection in software is much less.  Drug development or materials research, for instance, require large investments that might make the business model inviable without patent protection.  Software does not have that problem.
4. The vast majority of all current software patents are ridiculous.  Patents are supposed to be non-obvious to a skilled professional, and by that definition most software patents should be thrown out.
5. Name me a single software company that has thrived because of its patent protection.  Or, put another way, can you think of a software business that wouldn’t be possible without patent protection? (I’m talking about software businesses, not “patent raiders”).

Software patents have devolved to defensive weapons for large companies to protect themselves against litigation from other large companies at this point.  The only benefactors of software patents today are the “patent raiders” who buy up questionable patents and hold large companies for ransom (and of course their attorneys).

Commentary | Leave a Response | Trackback