ZDNet UK


Skip to Main Content

ZDNet.co.uk - Winner of Best Business Website 2007
  1. Home
  2. News
  3. Blogs
  4. Reviews
  5. Prices
  6. Resources
  7. Community
  8. My ZDNet

 

ZDNet UK RSS Feeds


IT Jobs

Intellectual property Toolkit

Patent nonsense: the case for unfettered development

Tom Chance and Edward Griffith-Jones ZDNet.co.uk

Published: 18 Feb 2005 16:45 GMT

  • Email
  • Trackback
  • Clip Link
  • Print friendly
  • Post Comment

The Computer Implemented Inventions Directive (CIID) has caused considerable controversy ever since it started passing through the corridors of the European Union in 2002. But understanding the directive, the legislative processes involved and the consequences for the software industry is a mind boggling task.

Let's be clear about what we mean by software patents. The argument revolves around the question of whether or not we should be able to patent physical inventions that use software -- such as a car braking system -- and whether or not we should be able to patent software itself. Most anti-patent groups accept that the former should be patentable, whilst the latter shouldn't. For small and medium enterprises (SMEs), who make up the majority of the industry, patents on pure software would be a disaster. But for some big businesses they are a lucrative prize.

Consider the implications for a moment. Software ideas as trivial as converting Windows 95 filenames to Windows NT filenames are being patented in the EU already. If the CIID passes through and legalises these software patents, every business would need to hire lawyers to track patents to avoid infringement. But this would be a near-impossible task given the number and trivial nature of so many patents -- imagine trying to write software without a progress bar, menu tabs or certain kinds of multitasking! Avoiding this will represent an unnecessary distraction from the business of writing software, which is already lucratively protected by copyright law.

If legalised, it will be practically impossible for developers to avoid software patent infringement. The alternative is to build a defensive portfolio of software patents, so that if a big business accuses you of infringement you can negotiate your way out of expensive legal procedures with cross-licensing deals. These costs, however, would inevitably be passed onto the consumer.

Companies like Acacia Research who "develop, acquire and license" software patents will prosper without ever writing a line of code. They could sue for infringement on software they never invented, and would be immune from countersuits.

Patents, or state-granted monopolies, were originally introduced to protect physical inventions; they are not suitable for ideas, mathematical algorithms or code. Big business and patent portfolio companies, would effectively be able to stifle competition and innovation in the SME sector. According to research by the Green-EFA group, a parliamentary group made up of the Greens and the European Free Alliance, 43 percent of all the software patents currently registered are owned by only 50 companies, most of which are American or Asian.


'I was a software developer'
Photo Credit: FFII

Next

Previous

1 2 3


  • Email
  • Trackback
  • Clip Link
  • Print friendly Print with Dell

Did you find this article useful?
305 out of 640 people found this useful


Related Jobs

IT Strategy Consultants Consulting

Additionally you will be: Fluent in the issues associated with managing IT in large, complex organizations Equally comfortable in role of business or ...

Senior Root Cause Analyst - Implementation

Working with others to find (negotiate) a solution that all involved parties agree with. ABOUT EDS: EDS provides a broad portfolio of business and ...

Application Consultant

We require consultants who will provide thought leadership in any or all of the following areas: Application Portfolio Management, Data Migration and ...

Discussions

AdamW AdamW

Linux, Laptops and Dual Displays

Saturday 26 July 2008, 6:34 PM

2 comments
keithmv keithmv

Password Deadlock

Saturday 26 July 2008, 12:02 PM

2 comments

Featured Talkback

Now is the time to start taking this danger VERY seriously. This is big and very nasty business in action. The objective seems absolutely clear. Destroy GPL and 'steal' all the technology. An activity with plenty of precedence.

By: Moley

Read full story:
Linspire Linux deal 'worse than Novell'