Re: [Patents] IBM Patent release

[Bernard Lang <Bernard.Lang@inria.fr>]

It may be a little of PR ... but a lot more too.

For one thing, I know for a fact that the pro SwPat crowd is very
eager to prove that Free Software is compatible with SwPat.

Free software is becoming popular, and they see it more and more as an
obstacle.

But in addition there are many other reasons.

I have analyzed some in 
  http://pauillac.inria.fr/~lang/libre/reperes/#IBM-pledge
and in various snippets:
  http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=135618&cid=11319510
  http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=135861&cid=11346193

 It certainly is PR. If only because it got all media talking about
IBM, its patents and how innovative IBM is. Much advertising at no
cost (given that the donation pays for itself, see below).

It is PR because a lot of free software users think well of a company
that is apparently doing its best to support free software against the
scourge of software patents. But how many of these do know that IBM
has been and still is at the forefront of political lobbying for more
software patents in the world?

Making free software depend on IBM patents, and making the defense of
free software against lawsuits depend on IBM willingness to assert
those patents against whoever would sue free software developpers or
users (see the IBM pledge :
http://www.ibm.com/ibm/licensing/patents/pledgedpatents.pdf
[ibm.com]) gives IBM a lot of leverage on whatever happens with free
software.

Furthermore, free software has been able to compete successfully with
Microsoft, and to contain to some extent Microsoft software power, a
thing no corporation was able to do, including IBM.

From an economic perspective, when two economic activities are
complementary, and actually done by different corporations, each
business sector will try to commoditize the neighboring business so
that more money and profit remain available for its own
activity. Commoditization of complementary business is also a way to
reduce its control, and to be freer ans more secure when it comes to
managing a business strategy.

This is the case for software vs services, or for hardware vs
software. IBM business is mostly based on hardware and services, and
software publishing is only a minor part. But software stand between
the two main business activities of IBM, and gives too much leverage
to whoever controls software publishing, not to mention the
profit. Supporting free software is a way of commoditizing software,
and thus leave more control space and profit for IBM. If in addition
it gives IBM some control over basic software (especially the
operating system), all the better.

So it is IBM best interest to actually get software patents and the
control that goes with them, and to make some of those patents
available to free software developement.  But, mind you, it is
certainly not a gift or a donation. Just good business strategy.


Bernard

* Jonas Maebe <jonas.maebe@ugent.be>, le 24-01-05, a écrit:
> 
> On 24 jan 2005, at 09:23, Nari Lee wrote:
> 
> >I have received the following info.
> >http://www.ibm.com/ibm/licensing/patents/pledgedpatents.pdf
> >Anybody on this list knows or care to comment on the utility of any of 
> >these patents
> 
> They're useful because they clearly admit those are software patents, 
> and at least 44 of them are granted in Europe as well 
> (http://kwiki.ffii.org/IbmEp0501En). Nevertheless, all of those would 
> be considered "computer-implemented inventions which make a technical 
> contribution" under the proposed Commission and Council texts.
> 
> >or why IBM is doing this "really"?
> 
> PR.
> 
> 
> Jonas
>