Reading 13: On Trolls
Patents were created to encourage invention. Engineers and other inventors daring to push the envelope, which is generally to societies benefit, get 20 years to develop, perfect, and monetize their inventions before competitors can enter the same market. In theory, the patent system benefits the little guys, the average individual with an amazing idea. Patents are granted with the intent of protecting the ideas (intellectual property) of each person without massive corporations scooping up the idea and doing it better, faster, and on a larger scale before anybody else has a chance to make money off their idea.
In my opinion, I think that patents are necessary in order to keep the big companies from squashing individuals and smaller companies. These groups need protected paths to innovation, however, I think there may need to be more regulations as far as who can hold which patents, as the current system appears to be hindering innovation a lot of the time. Perhaps any given company should only be able to hold a certain number of patents. Perhaps a company should be required to be actively developing the technology covered by a patent in order for it to stay valid, rather than let it get dusty on the shelf. Perhaps there is a different system entirely that allows the smaller innovators a fair playing field, I’m just not sure what that could look like.
Given the current legislature surrounding patents, I think it would be extremely hard to grant many software patents. The language used to describe innovative technology clearly has machinery and other physical tools in mind so it would be incredibly hard to make a case for software. I think if the legislature were to be updated to meet 21st –century requirements and language, software patents would be a more viable, and good idea. I think no matter how the law is changed it will be tricky to patent, especially with the rise of open source software, but I think it is possible for particularly outlandish and innovative concepts.
As with most things, the patent system can be a problem when it is taken to extremes. At present, when you see patent trolls targeting small companies, I think it may be a bit broken. That being said, I like to believe there are two sides to everything. A friend of mine’s dad is a lawyer for a company called Intellectual Ventures described as the “most hated company in tech” here:
https://www.cnet.com/news/inside-intellectual-ventures-the-most-hated-company-in-tech/
In talking to my friend’s dad, and having read the article, it doesn’t seem like these “Patent troll” companies are nearly as cut-throat or bad for innovation as the media and Silicon Valley portrays them. While these companies making their revenue solely through patent litigation can have a negative impact on smaller innovators, the article notes that they can often have the opposite affect as well. Many small companies and individuals partner with Intellectual Ventures to come up with new ideas and protect themselves from the larger tech organization. One partner thinks of “Intellectual Ventures as a bodyguard of sorts, a big threat to companies that would happily step on his intellectual property.” The article additionally notes the hypocrisy of annoyance with patent trolls as many of these big tech companies- Apple, Google, Facebook, Samsung, to name a few- are spending billions to acquire patents and sue each other for infringement.
I believe that as much of the tech world shifts towards supporting open source projects and ideas this patent issue will become less and less of an issue, particularly as far as software goes.
