Problem with software patents

Several large technology companies support the President's proposal because of the way it changes the economic incentives "A strong fee-shifting provision that evens the playing field between trolls and their targets is essential for reducing the incentives for abusive litigation, and we look forward to working with the Administration and Members of Congress to achieve that goal.

But not everyone is on board, particularly companies that have a cache of software patents. Singling out computer-enabled inventions as a class could inadvertently put at risk innovation for many industries that rely on software, from manufacturing to biotech.

The America Invents Act includes business-method provisions that have been in effect for only six months.

He, of course, makes no mention of the innovations being threatened already by continuing to allow the already identified problem of software patents to persist. Further, it is a program for business method patents that is in place, not one for software patents, the BSA statement in effect itself highlights the problem of the current system as it does not address the problem.

For all of the posturing by BSA, the President's proposal does little to directly address the heart of the problem, which is the patenting of software. Often the patents for software are of "low quality" which then makes playing "troll" games easy for those inclined to do so.

One should not be shocked that these patents are not of the quality we have come to expect from the U. PTO, because patent does not fit software. It is a square peg in a round hole. Put most simply, trying to get a patent to fit software is exactly trying to take a system designed to protect physical invention, such as a lawn mower, and somehow have it cover expression, such as stories and poems.

Some quick history. In , because of a new patent appellate court, obtaining patents was made easier. When we have unclear patents, when the boundaries are vague, then people cannot adequately check whether their innovations infringe or not.

Julie Samuels at the Electronic Frontier Foundation has a blog post exactly taking on why we cannot " Darren now runs his own firm EvokeIP. Below, he shares some of his thoughts towards patenting software and the issues which come with it. The software industry differs from other major innovative industries; what unique issues can this present when trying to patent an invention?

The most innovative, and by value the greatest companies are Apple, Facebook, Google. What is the common designator here? At base they are software companies. What should they consider when looking for protection with this in mind? I have been fighting the good fight for software to be patentable, since , as long as what it does is novel and inventive. Some argue that to prevent patent trolls and promote true software innovation, the scope and length of software patent protection should be limited, e.

Do you agree with this? This is in my opinion, and in the opinion of my US colleagues, a worrying development. Dr Darren Murley started his career as an electronic engineer, gaining a first class degree in Physics with Digital Microelectronics. Ricci, you are shut out. Even if you get a patent, the legal resources of large firms will often be sufficient to break it. Without the resources of a large firm, there is so much risk in entering a market it becomes hard for small firms to even fund work.

The always-skittish venture capitalists will shy away. Where does this stop? Do we eventually get to the state of affairs where one is not even permitted to publish research in areas where there are patents?

However, unless the examiner…………. Man, I was shopping the other day, I usually leave the shopping cart at the end of isle and walk the isles for the items I need. I had to go around corner this one time to find my item and when I came back someone had dumped my stuff on the floor. And there were 2 big guys standin near by, and I said, hey man you threw my stuff on the floor man, whats with that? I want to tell you something man, I was SCAred.

The Problem with Blogs The New York Times spends a lot of money to have reporters go out and do reporting, fact checkers, editors, etc The blogger takes all this work for free, and expects a tip in his tip jar. That sound fair to you? The times starts with a sob story about Mr Phillips an Vlingo. This is a basic, beginner first step: if you think you have a better widget — say for voice recognition software — you go thru the exisiting patents, and see what is already out their.

And what you find, is that it is very, very very rare that your new widget is really different from everything else out there; you almost alwasy find that there is already a boatload of exisitng patents.

As for the fights between the big boys — Samsung, Apple et al, what will almost certainly happen in ayear or two, as happened many years ago in metallurgy and carmaking, is that all the big guys will cross license to each other; each will have a stable of patents, and no one can proceed without a license to all the different stables.

Has anyone noticed that there is a lack of innovation and new products? It is a linked list. People who climb up the achievement ladder will be those who consistently solve the problems of sustainable living through real progress.

Colbert, Armstrong did his due diligence. So did Eckert and Mauchly. If you are small and have an idea that some really wealthy firm wants your idea, it will be stolen from you. And, yes, as an energy researcher I have noticed a crying lack of innovation in critical areas.

Patents are problematic in other ways: they are more usually used to block innovation than encourage it. I know of specific instances where large firms preferred to bury a disruptive innovation than produce it. It is largely because Bell Labs and Xerox PARC did not effectively defend their intellectual property that modern computing exists at all: everything that Apple now produces relies on innovations developed at those places. Had those firms defended their IP, it seems likely that modern computing would have waited for another generation, if it developed at all.

Sure, the patent system is not perfect, what man-made system is? But the iPhone for example, would not have been made without it.