$400 Million IP Experiment Making Some Nervous 262
BrianWCarver writes "IP Law & Business shines the spotlight on Intellectual Ventures, the IP start-up founded in 2000 by former Microsoft chief technologist Nathan Myhrvold. According to some estimates, Intellectual Ventures has amassed 3,000-5,000 patents, with the help of a $400 million investment from some of the biggest technology companies, including Nokia, Intel, Apple, Sony, and Microsoft. As the patent stockpile grows, so does the speculation--and the fear. IP lawyers and tech executives worry that Intellectual Ventures is less interested in changing the world with big ideas, and more focused on becoming an über patent troll, wreaking litigation havoc across industries with its patents."
For the better, no doubt (Score:5, Insightful)
Patent Bashing (Score:5, Insightful)
International Impact (Score:5, Insightful)
Imagine in 10-20 years, China becomes the biggest economy in the world, it ignores all the US patents, and just use those patents to roll out their own products.
For example, a patented medicine sold by an US company to Africa at $10 per bill, and the same "Made-In-China" pill cost $0.01, what is to stop Africa from buying from China instead?
Right now US is still powerful enough so that other countries must agree to certain rules/laws made in USA, in exchange for free trade deals, but when that strength faded, so will the leverage.
I draw this opinion from the recent, possible change of international whaling law, where Japan is about to gather enough votes to start commercial whaling again. So what is deemed illegal in the last few decades will soon become acceptable when the power shifted.
Re:For the better, no doubt (Score:5, Insightful)
Not that soon, I think... but eventually it might.
Right now, too many too powerful have too much to lose should the status quo change.
Re:No wonder some are nervous! (Score:2, Insightful)
They are proposing adding a 5th octet as an interim move until v6 is widely adopted.
That doesn't sound far off from what they're trying to do: patent every neat idea they can. "Hey! A fifth octet. IPv5! V5... hey! Patent a 5 cylinder internal combustion engine! {repeat ad infinitum}"
Re:Patent Bashing (Score:4, Insightful)
It should be easy to figure out. (Score:5, Insightful)
Anybody who has been throught the early years of Microsoft's war on the IT industry knows what kind of a person he is. Suffice it to say he is not a nice guy trying to make the world a better place.
Re:net here! (Score:2, Insightful)
been here before (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe we'll have the same corrections this time but without the economic collapse. Did I just suggest we've learned anything from the past? Very sorry, I'll stop now.
Re:net here! (Score:3, Insightful)
I mean, the attempt alone to push it through as a sidenote in the fishing committee... Fishy doesn't even come close to how that reeked.
Re:International Impact (Score:5, Insightful)
Since software is often not a real product (it's a tool that is used to make other products), this could have a serious effect on the US economy. In the worst case, this would start happening to Free Software - it would be free-beer for any non-US company to use, but cost money for the patent license in the USA.
It's just not one big player (Score:5, Insightful)
On the face of it, this sounds advantageous. It allows more cool features in processors and alleviates those three companies from having to worry about getting involved in frivolous lawsuits with their main competitors.
Now perhaps Intel patented the XOR operation. Sure the patent is blatantly unfair, but since IBM and AMD can already use it then they have no need to fight intel's patent. THe only person who would want to fight it would be some new player in that space, but who'd have the resources?
If large corporations start broadly cross-licensing technologies then it'll effectively kill the little guy and sew up the market.
Let's see this for what it is, shall we? (Score:5, Insightful)
IP is the oil of the information age (Score:5, Insightful)
Just like skyrocketting oil prices have convinced politicians on the need for alternative energy sources. Sure an economic standstill works, but it's horribly painful for everybody (except for those who are profiting short-term).
What is really needed is an education effort on IP reform. Not just for the politicians, but for the public at large, so they can elect forward thinking leaders.
Re:Let's see this for what it is, shall we? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Their "ambition" will undo them (Score:3, Insightful)
Decent points, but (Score:5, Insightful)
NB:
-If the invention is, e.g. "one-click shopping" the public will reply "who gives a fuck?! duh!" Hence the non-obviousness requirement.
This is why patent-trolling is not just name-calling. Many companies (and here it seems we have the epitome) have, as their business model, making-it-impossible-for-others-to-do-their-work-w ithout-paying-us-a-fee.
Patents are supposed to be about collecting-a-fee-for-helping-others-do-their-work- better. In particular: helping them do it better in a way they might never have imagined.
it will backfire on them (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:International Impact (Score:3, Insightful)
Excuse me? What, exactly, have we been talking about for the past 11 years then? See: http://cloanto.com/users/mcb/19950127giflzw.html [cloanto.com] and http://burnallgifs.org/archives/ [burnallgifs.org] for some background. Also see: http://swpat.ffii.de/pikta/xrani/mpeg/index.en.ht
Hell, for a more generic discussion see: http://www.bitlaw.com/software-patent/history.htm
(Score: 3, interesting) my A$$. Should be (Score: -1, wrong)
Re:For the better, no doubt (Score:1, Insightful)
You would be surprised. Enough people I deal with in both parties are annoyed with the intellectual property license abusers. The new scandal that is brewing is the payola scheme involving prescription drug firms paying off the generic firms to keep them from pulling their drug into generic land. It's a racket that represents collusion at the expense of the insurance carriers, government medical payments and ultimately the general public
IP parasites are not popular people. If you evaluate polling data on Congress, you will discover that is has a lower rating than the President's pathetic numbers (it's hard to believe there could be something even lower). When it comes to their re-election and special interests that have been too greedy, they'll throw the greedy overboard in a flash. Toss in the complexities of intellectual property law - it's something the common man cannot relate to. Let Nathan and his jet-setting, trust-fund peer group try explaining why they need another billion dollars from Joe consumer right now with $3.00 plus oil, GM/Ford demise, airline bankruptcy and pension fund disasters and you'll invite reform in the spirit of the French revolution.
It would be a tremendous benefit to have a parasitic IP troll effort come forward and help clean house. They certainly don't see it, but it would be received by the current Congressional climate as no different than the CEO of Worldcom, Enron and all the big oil CEOs demanding Congress give them even greater profits and multi-billion dollar paychecks.
Please Nathan, push your greed forward. Don't be satisfied with the hundreds of millions you already eeked out of a mediocre job. Congress needs another target to improve their polling data and the tiered Internet greed just lacks the emotional factors necessary for riling up the masses.
Re:I knew I should have patented... (Score:3, Insightful)
Patents are "supposed" to be used for exactly what we the people decide they should be used for. They are an artificial temporary monopoly that WE citizens have agreed to allow (through our representatives) in exchange for the economic benefit that goes along with the monopoly. That benefit is a window of opportunity to recoup the investment in R&D used to create the product, which in turn encourages economic development and investment.
I (and it would appear I'm not alone) did not ever agree to "idea squatters" that randomly combine trivial technologies, never produce product and ultimately REDUCE the very economic investment and development that patents were supposed to encourage.
No, it's not name calling, it's calling a spade a spade.
Re:Patent Bashing (Score:3, Insightful)
On the contrary; maybe having the economy dragged to a standstill is the only way to let the politicians realize the folly of the 'everything's patentable' world. If it would lead to change, the temporary stagnation might be worth it.
The way I see it, without this whole IP/patent business, the situation is as follows:
Politicians noticed that a long time ago, and try to fix it like this:
It's a rip off, it probably won't work in the long term, it wreaks havoc within the US on the short term, and it's counter productive as a whole - but the alternative is a lower standard of living for the whole US, and they're trying to postpone that.
(not an economist, and describing a view from Europe)
Re:For the better, no doubt (Score:3, Insightful)
If by "everyone" you mean "established monopolies"... Say Apple and Microsoft agree to play together. With their pooled resource they have "a system of libraries for a graphical user interface that allows other applications to run" patented. Who is going to be able to challenge them in their markets? Or what if GSK patents "a system for cloning brain cells", even though they don't have the technology or products developed yet? That is pretty much this company's stated [intellectualventures.com] goal:
Maybe if I saw the EFF, ACLU, and Google combining their efforts to assist Intellectual Ventures I'd have more hope for this idealistic view of things...
Re:Decent points, but (Score:3, Insightful)
And now "imagining" means "purchasing". In no way, shape, or form should patents be assignable to a third party. The potential for abuse has already been realized in the courts again and again.
Just look at the name of the company. They were set up, specifically to be a patent troll. Obviously the companies in question figure half a billion dollars is chump change in return for what they can get with just a few "settlements" (RIM, anyone?)
This scares me. No doubt this company will start buying out other "patent holding firms", amassing a rediculously big software IP portfolio, to the point that any development of any kind requires a "development license" that covers you against lawsuits. Because I have to assume that with 5000 patents and counting, just about any website or Windows/OSX app that I write is going to infringe on one of them.