Re: [Patents] re: UK software company kicked out of US

[Nick Hill <t0@nickhill.co.uk>]

On Mon, 16 Dec 2002 02:07:52 -0500 (EST)
Gregory Aharonian <srctran@world.std.com> wrote:

I am not sure where your line of argument is taking us. I will take issue
with certain positions:
> 
> Rik asks:
> >I can't see how Greg would justify software patents in the EU when it
> >would just stifle innovation in more places than one...
> 
> First, there is ZERO statistical or economic data that shows that
> software patents stifle innovation any more than patents in other
> areas of technology.  

Because other industries have to deal with the burdens of the patent
system, it doesn't mean the software industry has an obligation to have the
same trouble.


> I assume Rik is a programmer, and would
> suggest that he talk to people in other industries where patents
> are one part of business strategy.  Indeed, it would be hard to
> measure such a minor effect in light of issues (like the dot-com
> crash) that affect the economics of the software industry.  Since
> there is nothing holy about software, much like other industries
> that have to deal with patents, so too does software.

Software deals with abstract ideas. They are not connected with or limited
by matter. A patent on an abstract idea can and often is worded without
reference to where and how this idea can and is likely to be applied. It is
therefore impossible to search the patent database and have any degree of
confidence you have found patents covering what you want to do. It
therefore makes the business of designing and releasing innovative software
a dangerous, costly and litigious activity. Things which stifle innovation.



> Second, the observation about the UK company was meant to illustrate
> the global nature of these issues.  Europe is free to abandon logic
> and reason and deny patents for software. 

I have not found any background info to this case on the web. Without
knowing more, I would not comment about this specific case. I would be
interested to see more background info.

Snip things I won't comment on

>  And have foreign patents
> are no guarantee of success, as the UK company's plight showed -
> even with US patents, it still lost.

This shows that being small and having a patent in a marketplace will not
protect you against bigger companies with a bigger portfolio in the same
marketplace. 

A popular myth supporting the patnet system is that of a lone inventor
coming up with a brilliant idea, then being able to market his wonderful
new product without being driven out of business by bigger concerns. This
case, from what I understand sp far, shows the patent system does not work
this way. The patent system creates a breed of capital which can be used to
stifle smaller capital entering the market, thereby reducing competition.


> And frankly, I think more European businesspeople are realizing that
> the current Euroepan patent policies in areas like software and
> business methods, are a form of unilateral disarmament.

On the contrary. European businesses can patent and sue Amercan companies
for infringement. American companies cannot patent in Europe and sue
European companies for such. 

If software patents were allowed in Europe, a massive number of existing US
patents will be registered in Europe, putting european software businesses
at a massive disadvantage.

The only way forward is to refuse software patents in Europe, increasing
the competitiveness and ingenuity of European software, whilst America
learns. This will, unfortunately for Americans, put a lot of software and
technology out of their reach.


Regards


Nick.