IBM Ditches Outsourcing Patent

Xenographic writes "IBM has dropped their controversial outsourcing patent, both withdrawing the application and placing it into the public domain. Apparently, it was filed eight months before they implemented more stringent reviews of their patent applications so as to avoid filing for obvious patents, especially business method patents. The notice also says that they would like to thank the community for bringing it to their attention."

Comments

it's patently ridiculous

[User 956]

Apparently, it was filed eight months before they implemented more stringent reviews of their patent applications so as to avoid filing for obvious patents, especially business method patents.

As a matter of fact, they've patented their stringent review process, and would like to take this opportunity to tout their reasonable patent review process licensing terms.

Speechless

[mrbill1234]

Not seeing anyone comment on this yet - I think everyone must feel the same as me.

Speechless.

Kudos to IBM.

Re:Speechless

[rsmith-mac]

We're only speechless because we're still trying to figure out what the catch is. IBM is a company, companies as a rule of thumb aren't nice when it means they're not making money for their shareholders. Just take a look at their comments, it wreaks of PR-speak.

If they passed on this patent, there's a reason why, and it's not because they're trying to be "nice."

Re:Speechless

[marcello_dl]

> IBM is a company, companies as a rule of thumb aren't nice when it means they're not making money for their shareholders.

Maybe it all boiled down to considering the potential dollars coming from that patent, net of the probable litigation costs, Vs the actual loss of face in front of the geeks that are helping IBM fight MS dominance in the desktop OS.

Well done IBM, the currently less evil of 'em all.

Re:Speechless

[mrbill1234]

Regardless of the motive - they did the right thing.

This is something to applaud rather than pour scorn on.

Re:Speechless

[Djinh]

Why does everyone act like it's perfectly normal for companies to act in a completely anti-social manner? I think most people wouldn't accept that from their neighbours and that anti-social actions by companies is hurting our world more than ever.

The future is not in the type of market fundamentalism that we see around us so much. The future is in every part of our society acting somewhat responsibly. IBM is further along that curve than most companies.

This is a good thing, no need to be super-cynical about it.

Re:Speechless

[smilindog2000]

Yes, more kudos to IBM! Frankly, with this long string of seemingly good-guy/non-evil actions from IBM, I'm tempted to try to send them more business. I don't know about the rest of us here, but over the years, I suspect I've influenced decision makers' vendor choices to the tune of probably about $1M/year now. That includes sending a bunch of guys to Dell (and now HP), RedHat (and now Ubuntu), steering people clear of Novel (and now Apple). I suspect that the sum total of business influenced by we geeks who care about this kind of thing is billions. Good for IBM to get it.

Re:Speechless

[geminidomino]

Why does everyone act like it's perfectly normal for companies to act in a completely anti-social manner? Because it is? It's been drilled into our heads since highschool that the point of business is to make money by any means necessary, and business hasn't done anything to counter that impression.

I think most people wouldn't accept that from their neighbours and that anti-social actions by companies is hurting our world more than ever. Most people accept a lot of shit from big companies that they wouldn't accept from another person.

The future is not in the type of market fundamentalism that we see around us so much. The future is in every part of our society acting somewhat responsibly. Then the future is fucked. Might as well fellate a shotgun now. Modern society is incompatible with personal responsibility.

IBM is further along that curve than most companies. Talk about setting your low bars...

Re:Speechless

[Aladrin]

Because it -is- 'normal'. It's not right or proper, but it -is- normal.

1. conforming to the standard or the common type; usual; not abnormal; regular; natural.

It's the way most large corporations act because they -know- they can get away with it and they'll make more money doing so.

I'm one of the few not applauding IBM for this. They did the right thing, and that's good, but they should have done it in the first place. They aren't sorry they did it, either... Notice they'd like to thank us, not apologize to us. This was just another self-serving thing a corporation did that happens to fall in line with what the public wanted, probably because they had no other avenues of profiting from this.

The only way we might really gain from this is if other companies see that listening to the public can get them good publicity, free advertising, and happy customers, and they follow suit. I'm not real hopeful.

Re:Speechless

[suv4x4]

Well done IBM, the currently less evil of 'em all.

If Bill Gates could see what you wrote, he'll stay there staring at his giant screen with his jaw dropped for the longest time ever, then fall on the floor dead.

Re:Speechless

[rucs_hack]

I have a theory, possibly wrong.

They realised it was a patentable thing, but didn't want it. So they filed, got it, and put the patent in the public domain, thus protecting themselves from any problems that might emerge from such a patent being granted to a patent troll.

Re:Speechless

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, IBM has been using the "patent everything for protection" strategy for decades

They rarely sue anybody else for patent infringement. However, if you try to sue them, their lawyers will be happy to point out the three thousand IBM patents that your whatchamacallit infringes.

And they almost never settle. They kept the US Department of Justice in court for well over a decade, as I recall.

It was a sign of the sheer desperation of Darl McBride and crew at SCO when they decided to sue IBM. Yeah, your crappy little $30 million market cap (at that time) company is going to prevail against a company with $40 billion (at that time) in cash. Uh-huh.

That's OK.

[gbutler69]

It's OK for a company to make money. It's OK for a company to want to make money. It's OK for a company to "push the envelope" to make money.

It is also OK for all of us to PUSH BACK! With words. With our purchases. With actions.

A good company will respond to the wishes of the public and will no when they are about to step over a line the public will not stand for. Admitting they are wrong is a good thing.

Does it mean they won't try something similar in the future? Perhaps, but, that is not the point. The point is that they will respect the voice of the public if the public makes itself heard.

That is really all we can ask for. It is good that things like Slashdot and the rest of the internet allow us all to so unequivocally express our displeasure and let it be known that we feel a company's actions are overstepping what WE THE PEOPLE feel is appropriate.

It is good that a company can get such a clear message to provide them appropriate moral and ethical direction.

Wow

[suv4x4]

Apparently, it was filed eight months before they implemented more stringent reviews of their patent applications so as to avoid filing for obvious patents, especially business method patents.

Wow... so they did that? Now I know, IBM is a corporation as any, working for profit, and they probably had reasons better than altruism to drop a patent that could cause them issues in court in the future.

But I almost shed a tear reading this, a company giving up on a patent on their own since they consider it obvious. Next thing you know, we'll be allowed to do things with a single click.

Re:IBM = Indian Business Machines

[pix]

Bitter? Twisted? Join the IBM bashing. Yes - there will be jobs outsourced to India, China, Eastern Europe, Africa...indeed anywhere where there are cheaper skilled workers to provide service. That's the way that services companies (all of them...not just IBM) win their business. How many American companies do you know that would choose to pay more for their services to keep the jobs at the supplier in the US?

But IBM is more than just a services company...it does have a social conscience (world community grid, OO.o, patents, support for Linux etc etc), it produces some fantastic technology (System z mainframes, some of the best Unix boxes, some amazing software)...it does real research, not just product development, but real, pure research into physics, computer science...it is actively promoting green computing.

Sure - it's not perfect, there are always bits of a large corporate that are going to be "evil"(TM), I for one am glad that IBM is not a M$, or a SCO etc.

And yes, I do work for IBM, so I am biased. I do feel for my colleagues who are being outsourced...but I know that IBM will do its utmost to find them good jobs.

This patent?

[ThirdPrize]

Is this the one? In which case all they were patenting was an application that worked out which bits of the company you could outsource. It seems very vague to say the least.

Actually...

[Anonymous Coward]

Bitter? Twisted? Join the IBM bashing. Yes - there will be jobs outsourced to India, China, Eastern Europe, Africa...indeed anywhere where there are cheaper skilled workers to provide service. That's the way that services companies (all of them...not just IBM) win their business. How many American companies do you know that would choose to pay more for their services to keep the jobs at the supplier in the US?

But IBM is more than just a services company...it does have a social conscience (world community grid, OO.o, patents, support for Linux etc etc), it produces some fantastic technology (System z mainframes, some of the best Unix boxes, some amazing software)...it does real research, not just product development, but real, pure research into physics, computer science...it is actively promoting green computing.

Sure - it's not perfect, there are always bits of a large corporate that are going to be "evil"(TM), I for one am glad that IBM is not a M$, or a SCO etc.

And yes, I do work for IBM, so I am biased. I do feel for my colleagues who are being outsourced...but I know that IBM will do its utmost to find them good jobs.

Re:Actually...

[Wolfbone]

"Sure - it's not perfect, ..."

It was even less 'evil' once:

http://web.archive.org/web/20060426151241/http://www.siam.org/siamnews/mtc/mtc593.htm

Re:Actually...

[MMC Monster]

I always wonder about things like this.

For a multinational corporation as big as IBM, is it "evil" for them to outsource jobs to India, China, etc? What if they outsourced jobs to the U.S. Would that be considered evil as well?

By moving jobs to where the labor is cheaper, they are proping up those economies. The more money the people have in poorer nations, the more companies will flourish there, providing more customers for services & products produced by IBM.

It's a long-term plan for a company that plans to be around decades from now. Should it be labeled evil?

Re:Actually...

[raddan]

It's hard, and one could argue, irrational, not to be concerned about one's own financial well-being. You don't hear many people saying, "I lost my job, but by golly, free trade will work it all out in the end!"

So while it may be true that free trade is better for the world, in aggregate, it does not change the fact that it is worse for many individuals. Considering that the individual is almost always powerless in the employer-employee relationship, especially in the case of a multinational corporation, I find it hard to have sympathy for the corporation. I won't even get into comparing the expense accounts of the highest-paid employees to the wages of the lowest-paid.

Re:Actually...

[Bacon Bits]

For a corporation, "long-term planning" means "next fiscal quarter".

IBM will outsource because it improves their bottom line. And that is the bottom line. The fact that it increases the GDP of foreign nations and reduces the GDP of ours is not something they consider significant at all. When the US is no longer the GDP king, they will relocate their company to the nation that benefits them the most.

not ok for thieves, so not for business either

[wikinerd]

... It's OK for a company to "push the envelope" to make money ... It is also OK for all of us to PUSH BACK! With words. With our purchases. With actions.

Does this mean that it is OK for a thief to try to steal your precious laptop when you aren't looking, and only return it if you start yelling?

A patent is a monopoly - a restriction of freedom. Supposedly, a patent must document some useful knowledge that was not widely known before. For certain pieces of knowledge, some people might say that they can accept having to withstand a monopoly. But if a patent does not offer anything useful (ie it documents some knowledge that is widely available), then a monopoly on this knowledge would damage the economy and the culture of a country. In such a case, a useless patent on an obvious idea restricts your freedom so much that the patent holder is not very different than a thief. The patent holder of an obvious idea steals your freedom.

So, do you still think it's okay for a company to attempt to steal your freedom when you are busy with something else and you aren't paying much attention? If you notice and you start yelling at them, and they give you back your freedom (revoke the patent themselves), do you feel that you should really thank them?

There are some companies that will attempt to patent anything under the Sun and refuse to cancel their patents even if people take notice - these are the very bad guys. Some other companies will attempt the same but will voluntarily cancel their patents if you catch them - these are the mildly bad guys. A few other companies will never attempt to steal anything from you in the first place and will try to earn their place in the marketplace through respectable and ethical means - these are the good guys, and they are the ones that you should thank.

Thanks IBM, you did the right thing

[Cannelloni]

IBM used to be the Great Stan of Hardware and MS the Little Stan of Software, at least in many Mac users' eyes, but for many years now, IBM seems to have shifted over and joined the good guys (Apple is officially a GOOD company, right...?) Mainly, most likely, because it is good business practice, and IBM is the number one money machine, so good publicity = more respect = more money in the bank. Well in this case, you've earned it. Hats off to you, old IBM. I have always had the greatest respect for Big Blue, even during the Dark Ages in the 1990. It IS a rather austere but serious company.

Re:IBM = Indian Business Machines

[ASBands]

Dupe

Gah! Which one is real?