Continuing fun with software patents

Posted Feb 27, 2003 10:29 UTC (Thu) by mmutz (subscriber, #5642) [Link]

The patent offices might as well just award all those silly patents. The more these get awarded, the earlier it will be obvious that they are silly and that software patents should have no value or meaning.

Sorry, but that isn't going to work out: The more trivial patents are granted, the greater the patent portfolio of companies like Amazon and IBM and just about any bigger company.

It simply doesn't matter how easily they can be proved wrongly assigned by pointing to prior art. Consider a small software company that is about to release a new innovative product with a threat (perceived or real) to e.g. IBM. What will IBM do?

IBM: Hey, you're infringing on these five patent of ours. Pay $1,000,000.

(Company contacts his lawyer)

Lawyer: No, you don't infringe on these patents/they're invalid.

(Company pays lawyer $50,000 and goes back at IBM)

Company: No, we don't infringe on your patents, bugger off.

IBM: Well, you're right. --- Here's another five.

(Company gives them to Lawyer, pays Lawyer $50,000, Lawyer says they don't infringe...)

Company: No, those don't cut it either.

IBM: Right again. Here's yet another five.

Company: OK, I see. What do you want?

IBM: Sell us licenses for your patents for $50,000.

Comany: $50,000? They're worth $10,000,000.

IBM: We know. Would you like another five...?