Slashdot Mirror
Is The Lone Coder Dead?
CyNRG writes "The little guy. The one-person software company. Can it still exist today? That's me. I'm once again, after many years, writing my own commercial software to sell. A few things have changed: the patent feeding frenzy. This is my main concern. My perception is that one must verify that you don't infringe on any patents when developing new cool software, and that the explosion of patents granted by the USPTO has reached epic proportions. If this perception is true, then that makes it almost impossible for the Lone Coder to create something new that doesn't infringe on other patents. The amount of money required to perform the due diligence research seems like it would be greater than the amount of money needed to develop the software, or even the total revenues that the software could ever generate. Please someone tell me I'm wrong!" Is he?
Your real goal though is to write something, get it patented and then sell it for millions to the big boys.
Llamasoft is still just one guy in his house. He has a support crew, but he's really only the one guy, and he's putting out a title for GameCube soon.
So... no. That said, I know lots of other people that have two-three person teams that make a nice bit of cash here and there from coding.
As long as your code is good, it doesn't crash, and my grandma can use it without resorting to profanity, you'll make a nice piece of money.
Not alot, but maybe enough if you hire a good enough marketer.
Voodoo Girl is the bomb!
The Economist has a timely opinion piece about the patent problem in their most recent issue.r y_id=3376181"
http://economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?sto
And yet if you invest time and money into producing a product, only to find that it relies on a patented method, you might quickly find your investment going down the drain - or rather, the fruits of your labour going to the patent holder.
Spiderweb software is a 10-year old gaming company that only has one coder (President Jeff Vogel).
See http://www.spiderwebsoftware.com/.
Thomas Warfield, author of Pretty Good Solitaire, Pretty Good Majongg, etc., is also a Lone Coder.
See http://www.asharewarelife.com/.
See generally discussion on "micro-isvs" at http://www.microisv.com/.
-Richard
Remember though, you'll get fined TRIPLE the damages if you knowingly violate a patent, versus 1 x damages if you unknowingly violate. Ignorance isn't protection, but it would appear to be a helluva lot less expensive.
Damned if you do. Damned if you don't.
As long as your source is 'closed', you shouldn't have much to worry about. Cause how is anybody supposed to know that you used a patented algorithm in your code unless they reverse engineered it--which is illegal according to the DMCA. Go nuts.
Hmmmmn,
1) Some algorithms are easy to spot - you don't need the code.
2) Some patents cover business methods & possibly looknfeel.
3) The DMCA does not make all reverse engineering illegal.
I think patents are definitely a problem for all small software shops - closed or open.
My pics.
First of all, it's not usually the 'algorithm' that's patented, and that's the problem. Instead it's things like double clicking and other rediculous concepts. If it was an algorithm there wouldn't be a real problem with software patents as it's usually trivial to implement the same thing 1000 different ways.
Second, according to the DMCA reverse engineering is NOT illegal. Breaking copy encryption is.
Actually, that's Valve you're thinking of--you know, the company distributing games over Steam.
Blizzard is the one using bittorrent to distribute its patches, and their implementation of it is exceedingly poor.
Schlock Mercenary