[ILUG] Irish Software Association - Another Microsoft Shill?

[Justin Mason]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


My comments, blogged at http://taint.org/2005/04/21/214342a.html --

    'We don't want any further dilution of __the current situation on
    patents__,' she said in an interview with The Irish Times following
    her ratification as chairwoman of the ISA last night.'

My emphasis -- given that the current situation is that they are
unenforceable in Europe, that's good, because we on the other side don't
want a dilution either!

    'We do need to look at how the US is developing its software industry
    and a removal of the patent (sic) could weaken venture capitalists'
    appetites for investing in new innovative companies.'

The whole 'venture capital requires patents' line is easily debunked. I'm
sure the VC companies are telling Ms. Cullinane that they want patents,
of course; it's just that they're wrong. ;) Laura Creighton, a European
investor, gave a fantastic speech in Brussels in 2003 about investment
and patents:

    Software Patents (in the US in the 1990s) encouraged venture
    capitalists to make foolish investments, because they believed the
    patents were worth something. Venture capitalists often do not mind if
    the companies where they have invested go bankrupt -- as long as they
    hold title to the patents. They can start over again with a different
    team.

    Sadly, when the bubble burst, the venture capitalists discovered that
    their patents were only good for a trip to court -- or at least some
    legal wrangling with a bunch of lawyers. A software patent is not like
    a hardware patent, where typically one, or at most a few covers the
    whole invention. Dozens, sometimes hundreds of patents, are relevant
    to any piece of software. So an investor, who now owns the assets of a
    defunct company -- cannot take its patents and hand them to a new
    development team and say 'build this'. It is impossible to develop
    software today without infringing somebody's American patent.

    The venture capitalists, having lost fortunes backing companies which
    had no real product, are now uninterested in investing in any software
    companies whatsoever. Right now the American economy could benefit
    from more investment -- but the capital is not going into software
    companies. Again, part of the problem is software patents. The venture
    capitalists have learned that all software is in violation of
    somebody's patent. So they do not want to touch the stuff. Thus on the
    up side, and the down side, the existence of software patents have
    contributed to creating the stock bubble, and making the recovery
    slower and harder than it needed to be. So #4 is right out -- the
    existence of software patents are inhibiting investment right now, and
    for very good reason.

In other words, the __presence__ of software patents has 'weakened venture
capitalists' appetites for investing in new innovative companies', as Ms.
Cullinane put it.

Anyway -- to keep the VCs happy, small companies can still obtain
software patents in the US, and spend the tens of thousands of dollars
required to register and enforce them in court, if they so desire. They
can bring the US software industry to a legal standstill if they like,
as they seem to have done, as long as European software developers can
quietly carry on developing software for use outside the US ;)

But at least things aren't as bad as the situation with my neighbours --
I live a few miles from the offices of Acacia Research, the notorious
patent trolls, who've just initiated a new lawsuit against Intel and TI.

Reportedly however, they're planning to open a European office this
quarter...


- --j.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh CVS

iD8DBQFCaA/hMJF5cimLx9ARAryFAJoDQpH/wKFrA0IaMNVwy5cDMI9ndQCfRbcD
eVU1RT9qK2H6jlcii/xF6bI=
=9Wz/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----