home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky misc.int-property:1429 comp.unix.bsd:8768
- Newsgroups: misc.int-property,comp.unix.bsd
- Path: sparky!uunet!usc!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!ames!agate!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!mcgregor
- From: mcgregor@netcom.com (Scott Mcgregor)
- Subject: Re: Patents: What they are. What they aren't. Other factors.
- Message-ID: <1992Nov12.080547.5785@netcom.com>
- Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
- References: <1992Nov3.031010.17641@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <1992Nov4.035758.1767@netcom.com> <1992Nov5.163922.2616@zip.eecs.umich.edu>
- Distribution: usa
- Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 08:05:47 GMT
- Lines: 99
-
- In article <1992Nov5.163922.2616@zip.eecs.umich.edu> mcnally@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Mike McNally) writes:
-
- >You seem to have either a gigantic blindspot or an intentional tendency
- >to ignore:
-
- I'm not ignoring them. I recognize them. But I merely claim that they
- are only one side of the story. They are the parochial view of an
- independent programmer. There's nothing wrong with that. But what
- about the parochial view of a manager with experience with licensing?
- What about the parochial view of an investor in high tech companies?
- What about the paorchial view of end users who only buy software from
- Apple and Microsoft? What about the management, shareholders and
- employees of big companies like IBM and their parochial views?
- What about the parochial view of resellers, retailers and
- license companies and even lawyers? There are different costs and
- benefits to each of these parochial groups.
-
- The article in the constitution does not recognize any of these groups
- as being more priviledged of consideration. Nor does the actual patent
- statutes (with the acception that it implictly grants some
- preferences to small companies vs. large, and in other respects to
- patent attorneys and agents). It certainly does not recognize the
- case of the independent programmer or businessnesman as being
- priviledged, much though such a recognition would personally benefit me.
-
- So it is irrelevant to keep bringing up only the independent
- programmer situation when the costs and benefits to others aren't
- being considered as well.
-
- >5) Being an independent programmer without the financial backing of a
- > large software development house, I have neither the legal expertise
- > nor the financial resources to produce an acceptable patent application.
- > A substantial amount of innovation in the field of software comes from
- > small-time, independent programmers who would very often be either
- > forced to compromise their interest in their innovations by selling
- > their intellectual property interests to a firm that did have the
- > resources to pursue a patent or be locked out of protecting their
- > rights to their creation if they were either unwilling to compromise
- > those rights or unable to interest someone in financially backing them.
-
- I am fully aware of this as it is my own situation. I am operating my
- own small software and consulting firm. I don't have the financial
- resources to get a patent at this time. I don't have the financial
- resources to sell my product at anywhere near what Apple or Microsoft
- does either. I'm looking for that kind of capital. There are possible
- investors. Some of those investors might foot the bill for a patent if
- it were relevant in this situation. Some might insist on it as a
- condition of investment. If patents weren't available some of the
- latter investors would investo only in other high tech areas such as
- genetics, or hardware, and it would be tougher to raise capital for
- software. Its true that I might have to make some compromises to stay
- in business and that I might have to work with other companies who
- have more expertise and resources in remarketing and licensing so I
- can concentrate on other areas of expertise such as R&D. But I never
- expected that being in business would be otherwise.
-
- > Patents, with the substantial cost of researching and producing an
- > application, dramatically favor those market players who have the
- > financial resources it takes to get them. In the software world,
- > the richest players are often not the most productive innovators.
-
- Yes, they often purchase innovations from the smaller players. They
- are more likely to do so when there is strong intellectual property
- protection. When there is not they are likely to just copy from
- scratch and cut the innovator out of any compensation. Hard Drive
- hints that Microsoft has done this on occasion, and I have seen such
- activities at my own past employers.
-
- > I think that reasonable persons will agree that the tremendous amount
- > and variety of innovation produced by the smaller players in the
- > game is a Good Thing.
-
- Yes.
-
- > I'll leave it to you to figure out whether
- > the public would be well served by a system that puts the independent
- > at such a disadvantage that it would often be no longer worthwhile
- > for them to try to compete.
-
- Unfortunately most of the public doesn't experience the same costs and
- benefits that we do. Getting software from Apple or Microsoft is easy
- for them. Getting it from an independent is considered a pain in the
- neck. And if as I noted above the disadvantage is not so serious if
- you are willing (or interested) in partnering with financial resources
- or one of the larger companies who buy technology.
-
-
-
-
- --
-
- Scott L. McGregor mcgregor@netcom.com
- President tel: 408-985-1824
- Prescient Software, Inc. fax: 408-985-1936
- 3494 Yuba Avenue
- San Jose, CA 95117-2967
-
-
-
-