Slashdot Mirror


UK Developers Quit US App Store Over Patent Fears

iamflimflam1 writes "The Guardian is running a story on how app developers in the UK are withdrawing from the U.S. app store over patent fears. 'The growth of patent lawsuits over apps raises serious issues for all the emerging smartphone platforms, because none of the principal companies involved — Apple, Google or Microsoft — can guarantee to protect developers from them. Even when the mobile OS developer has signed a patent licence — as Apple has with at least one company currently pursuing patent lawsuits — it is not clear that it has any legal standing to defend developers.' This follows a blog post from the iconfactory about the death of independent developers. Have the big corporations really won? What is the future for small teams and one-man-band developers?"

43 of 192 comments (clear)

  1. It has to get worse before it gets better by Flipao · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The way things are, this is as good a start as any.

    1. Re:It has to get worse before it gets better by mrops · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I would have given this +1 Insightful however don't have mod points.

      It really needs to get really bad before people start realizing how patents are hurting economy and innovation, to a point where there vote on such matters count.

    2. Re:It has to get worse before it gets better by jhoegl · · Score: 2

      How long before AT&T was broken up?
      How long after is it almost back together?
      Yeah, nothing changes in the United States of Corporate America

    3. Re:It has to get worse before it gets better by elashish14 · · Score: 3, Informative

      >It really needs to get really bad before people start realizing how patents are hurting economy and innovation, to a point where there vote on such matters count.

      This statement is a little too general. Patents aren't necessarily the problem, what is more problematic is that they're being abused.

      Patents were supposed to protect small businesses and startups with a new idea. Now they're being used for extortion (a la Microsoft forcing Samsung, HTC, etc. to pay for a WP7 license on every phone they sell) and manipulation (see here). And it's much easier for large corporations to acquire them becuase they can pay for the application fees or patent auctions.

      What's obviously clear here is that patents aren't serving their original intention. What the US needs is legislation to stop patent abuse, particularly by large corporations. But there are too many lawyers in America, so it will never happen.

      --
      I have left slashdot and am now on Soylent News. FUCK YOU DICE.
    4. Re:It has to get worse before it gets better by theolein · · Score: 2

      I agree, the only way the patent suit business will ever die is if it gets so bad that only the huge developers can afford to produce products anymore. What is much more likely, though, is that people will stop selling products in the US market and that the US market will stagnate and slowly die. The Americans are extremely bad at implementing any legal reforms due to the immense amount of lobbying going on there. Frankly, given the state of the US economy, one would think that the Americans would see the need to implement reform, because all the patent nonsense does is isolate the US even more.

    5. Re:It has to get worse before it gets better by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is not a fault of patents per se. This is a fault of the US litigation system. Unregulated lawyer fees, which I agree are ridiculous, the possibility of forum shopping, so everyone ends up in Bumfuck, TX for their patent cases, non-technical judges that have no clue about the engineering aspects of a patent, jury trials, just to make sure that the deciding body has no clue about the matter at hand, and ridiculously overblown damages. The US patent system differs from the European one, but not so much as to hurt. What hurts is the difference in litigation. Over here in Europe I have seen small inventors going after global corporation over their patents - successful and on a budget. I have seen patent cases to the highest national court for a total cost in the low five figures. That won't kill a small business. Pushing the litigation costs before damages in the millions - that kills the small guys. Regulate your lawyers, guys.

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    6. Re:It has to get worse before it gets better by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 2

      In the case of the telephone - of course one gets the patent. The one filing the earliest, in a sane system that doesn't open the can of worms of "first to invent".

      Alas, this may not have happened in the case of the telephone. There is evidence that Elisha Gray both invented first and filed first. However, the examiner for Gray's application was an alcoholic who owed money to Bell's lawyer. Misery and controversy ensued, and Bell got the patent (not necessarily without skulduggery). Read this for a discussion of the evidence both ways.

      --
      Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    7. Re:It has to get worse before it gets better by zippthorne · · Score: 2

      The Americans are extremely bad at implementing any legal reforms due to the immense amount of lobbying going on there.

      No, it's due to the ability of lawyers to work odd hours and practice tear-down speeches as part of their jobs. As such, they have plenty of free time to devote to "public service." e.g. getting involved in legislatures.

      It is a bad idea of the highest degree to allow lawyers to even have a say in the lawmaking process. After all, they have a vested interest not in the quality of laws but the quantity....

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
  2. Re:Why are app stores their only option? by master_kaos · · Score: 2

    no kidding, the amount of clones is ridiculous, as much as I hate patents, you can't just blatantly rip off someone elses idea.

  3. Irony by gilesjuk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The irony that the US market is supposedly most free in the world yet patents are screwing it up.

    Surely more jobs and growth are being stifled by them than saved by them?

    1. Re:Irony by h4rr4r · · Score: 2

      That is what no one seems to be noticing. This will not kill the mobile market or the app developers of the world. Just hurt folks in the USA. These are the sorts of things that export our wealth and our capital. The more of these patent lawsuits are filed over trivial software the more companies will want to stay out of or get out of our market.

    2. Re:Irony by elashish14 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The irony that the US market is supposedly most free in the world yet patents are screwing it up.

      In America, freedom means 'freedom from government intervention.' What the translates to is slavery to private interests.

      If I were given the choice, I'd much rather be subject to government control rather than private interests, seeing as I would have at least some voice against the government...

      Surely more jobs and growth are being stifled by them than saved by them?

      Both of these statements are true. Small businesses are muscled out and replaced with a cubicle in a large corporate tower. But a corporation can never do wrong in America, even if they spill oil all over the Gulf of Mexico, so people run to them anyways.

      --
      I have left slashdot and am now on Soylent News. FUCK YOU DICE.
    3. Re:Irony by jo_ham · · Score: 4, Insightful

      BP is at least as American as it is British - the current BP was formed by the merger of two large corporations, one British the other American.

      Also, nice racism there. Because no one but America can make something that won't fail and cause massive pollution... oh wait.

    4. Re:Irony by twem2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Except patents are a government creation. The corporate world rests upon government intervention upon their behalf.

    5. Re:Irony by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You only have those choices because the government broke up their monopolies. Ever hear the song Sixteen Tons? I sold my soul to the company store.

      And we're mostly paying for wars to keep corporations happy. Meanwhile welfare makes up a small amount of money spent. But hey, don't let reality get in the way of a good right wing rant. Are you an astroturfer?

      --
      Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  4. Re:Why are app stores their only option? by gilesjuk · · Score: 2

    It depends on the mechanism for converting a free trial version into a full version. That is what the patent is on.

  5. Prohibition of the brain by belgianguy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Poor developers, putting effort, time and money in creating something original and functional, only to get sued by some bigcorp lawyer shmuck which informs you that they own the rights on the product you just made. They'll kindly ask you to cease and desist before they unleash lawyer hell on you and sue you right into the poorhouse.

    If you want to make it in IT these days, you should become a lawyer, not a software developer.

    1. Re:Prohibition of the brain by Macthorpe · · Score: 2

      As someone mentioned above, this isn't about cloning concepts. This is about being unable to do trivial things like bring up a dialog box saying "Would you like to pay more for more content" on a mobile phone, because someone decided that's so incredibly inventive that it needs to be protected.

      --
      "It does not do to leave a live dragon out of your calculations, if you live near him." - Tolkien
    2. Re:Prohibition of the brain by russotto · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why does this only seem to be an issue with mobile platforms

      Because it turns out that if you add the limiting clause "on a mobile computing device", everything old becomes new again.

    3. Re:Prohibition of the brain by Hognoxious · · Score: 2

      Top tip: Avoid being robbed by simply giving your money away.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  6. Re:Why are app stores their only option? by h4rr4r · · Score: 2

    Clone or not has nothing to do with it. These patents are on things like converting free game users to paying folks. In app payments stuff like that.

  7. US nowadays by cjcela · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Greed for power and money is crippling the US. Hope we realize how to stop this before we become a 3rd rank nation. Software patents, corrupted politicians, shortsighted MBAs, unscrupulous lawyers ... all of them are contributing to a quick degrade of business ethical values and to the loss of opportunities of the common man for the benefit of few. Sad state of affairs.

    1. Re:US nowadays by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The problem in the US is cultural. Everyone equates "prosperity", "progress" and "value" with "making more money". Therefore, it's not surprising that finance has become the central concern in business and indeed everyday life - enter the billions of MBA's to try to squeze every last penny out of every effort, the hordes of lawyers to defend those pennies, and the corrupt politicians to facilitate it all at the highest level.

      It used to be that the central concern in business was how much value your proposition brought, and that the expectation was that more value would equate to higher financial benefit. Although money was certainly part of the thinking, it was by no means the central point in the proposition.

      That's the fundamental change the american mind must undergo: it's not about how much you have, but how much *value* you provide (or, rather, how big your "(potential?) contribution to society" is). In essence, that's the true measure of how "great" (or not) a person or company is.

      BTW: I heard not too long ago that in underdeveloped nations, the single largest slice of college graduates were from law school (a significantly larger slice than the 2nd place profession) - and that that fact could be taken as an indicator to determine a nation's development status. Would be interesting to see where that is in the US...

      Cheers.

    2. Re:US nowadays by Mordok-DestroyerOfWo · · Score: 2

      We're already there, AC. I hear a lot of jingoistic chanting from my countrymen and it is the saddest form of denial. We have a laughable health system, a failing pension system, and an education system that seems to be a joke without a punchline. We consistently reduce taxes on the rich to the point where they're paying less as a percentage than they were in the 1950's with the feeble hope that this will help the job situation. The empire of the United States came and went in the blink of an eye, but hey...it was good while it lasted.

      --
      "Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
    3. Re:US nowadays by cjcela · · Score: 2

      I agree with you - all the issues I've referred to in my original post are there because of the complacency of the average US Citizen; people do not react because they are afraid of losing the meager middle class possessions they have. But the lot for the average person and small business is shrinking by the day, as larger companies and political interests take over. So eventually there will be not much for the average Joe to care about. It will be an interesting process to watch. As an example, one can look at the current power struggle about reducing spending and increasing debt between Democrats and Republicans - if such display of idiocy, blatant lack of care for the interests of the people that appointed them, and lack of vision (from both sides) were to be exercised by the management of a company, the board would fire all of them on the spot. So what are American voters going to do in the next election?

  8. Re:Why are app stores their only option? by Sique · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Thats as silly as it gets. If you were right, it would be immoral to build a house for shelter, just because someone else already had the idea to build a house. It would be illegal to make a cheese&bacon-sandwich just because someone else already made one. It's completely ok to build the umpteenth clone of Crush the Castle or Galaga, even if someone else already made one. You just shouldn't claim to be a creative game designer. And so I will my enjoy cheese&bacon-sandwich and continue to live in my house, well aware to be not the first one to ever do so.

    --
    .sig: Sique *sigh*
  9. Re:Free? as in speech? by h4rr4r · · Score: 2

    Free speech exists. You can say whatever you like without the government coming after you. Unless you are admitting to a crime or someone causing one with words. An example of the latter would be "Give me all your money" during a mugging.

  10. Re:This tweet (FTFA) shows how screwed up it is. by h4rr4r · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I agree, give me half a penny for every dollar you make. For insurance of course. It would be a shame if something happened to all that nice stuff you have.

  11. US is gonna die by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    can't wait to see it default on its trillions.

    fat ass american dipshits will get a rude shock.

    software patents are just one small symptom of your sick and twisted society

    1. Re:US is gonna die by sakdoctor · · Score: 3, Funny

      Oh pipe down, and take your anti-psychotic medication.

  12. Re:This tweet (FTFA) shows how screwed up it is. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I see you changed it, but now it looks like it includes a different idea I own... as well as another idea a friend of mine owns....this ain't your lucky day. BWAHAHAHAH!

  13. the problem with extortion by Lead+Butthead · · Score: 3, Insightful

    is that it never ends. it's 1/2% now, it will soon become 1%, then 2%, then 5%... and so on.

    --
    ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
  14. riiiiiighhhhtttt by Lead+Butthead · · Score: 2

    The patent trolls are holding all the cards right now. Hint - people holding all the cards isn't going to ask for a new hand. You think they're going to stop because you demanded so? I like to get some of that whatever the hell you've been smoking.

    --
    ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
  15. Us developers: Move to Europe? by Delgul · · Score: 2

    We escaped the Software Patent madness by a hair in the EU, but we escaped. Do it before August 2nd tho, or at least change your dollars to euros before that, or you will have to live under a bridge ;-)

  16. Re:This tweet (FTFA) shows how screwed up it is. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The patent system doesn't involve itself with seeing if you used someone else's idea, just with who came up with it first. The distinction is important: You can very well come up with something on your own, develop it into a product and then find out you have to pay someone else to be allowed to sell your own invention. Did you know that certain types of progress bars are patented? This bullshit needs to stop.

  17. Re:This tweet (FTFA) shows how screwed up it is. by spire3661 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There are too many humans to allow the continued allocation of one idea to a person. We have too many eyes now for this system to provide benefit. Very few human ideas are both unique to that human and a benefit to mankind.

    --
    Good-bye
  18. Re:This tweet (FTFA) shows how screwed up it is. by peragrin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    how about MSFT's $15 per android device fee? is that good?

    Also in software patents don't cover implementations but concept. therefore there is no way around and still meet spec.

    --
    i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
  19. Re:Free? as in speech? by t2t10 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Free markets only operate among the big players

    Markets dominated by a few big players are by definition not free.

    Maybe you mean "unregulated markets"; that's something very different.

  20. government creates monopolies by roman_mir · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I am always amazed at people who believe that government is there to help them, well, maybe some feel that because they are getting government checks, or are hoping to get them one day.

    But just look at the way government destroys free market and creates monopolies. You'd think that government wouldn't want monopolies for some reason (well, they say so) but in reality monopolies is governments' bread and butter. Government may be non-profit, but it's highly profitable to politicians, and others, who are near the trough. Monopolies have money to give to politicians and what would the competitive market participants give them and why?

    This is in everything, not just software. Look at the pharmaceutical industry: FDA costs are probably higher than any other costs of releasing a new drug into the market. I hear it takes 600 million dollars for one single drug to pass all of the steps, FDA requires from manufacturers, which means that there cannot be an independent small firm, bringing an independent drug into the market. This maybe the biggest cost out of all other costs - to pass through government regulations. So anybody creating a drug needs to get a sponsor - a large pharma company to do what the FDA requires.

    Now, if FDA only required to prove that the drug was safe for consumption, that's one thing. But they require the proof of efficacy - which means years of expensive studies, something that the market could have found much quicker and without this added cost, and something that actually causes real deaths, as people are not getting the drugs on time and the drugs are really expensive. Here is an interesting discussion on this matter, which explains how government is working on making your food ever more expensive and reducing your choices in the market, helping out the large monopolies and destroying the competition.

    The patents are a huge problem, they are not there to help you. As with everything that governments do, the effect of their actions and regulations is the opposite one. So if they are talking about fighting monopolies, in reality they create them, and if they are talking about increasing the innovation in the market, in reality they are actively preventing and destroying it.

    1. Re:government creates monopolies by roman_mir · · Score: 2

      Given the existence of the placebo effect, in what way do you suppose that the market -- consisting of individuals who operate on limited information -- will be able to tell the difference in efficacy between a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory and acupuncture?

      - ha ha, the way it was always done, by doctors sharing information among each other, learning what works and what doesn't - the only real way things are found to be useful or not.

      Especially given that so-called "alternative medicines" such as Zicam can effectively compete against science-based medicine even with FDA regulations in place? Do you propose we go back to the patent medicine era?

      - I am against all patents altogether. There should be no gov't creating artificial barriers to entry against individuals and for monopolies and there should be no special treatment provided to monopolies, like in case with this, falsifying the results to help out some friends in giant pharma. However FDA routinely denies people in US access to drugs, that are used all over the world, for example the drug RU 386, which was used in Europe and was banned in US by FDA.

      Why the fuck should some piece of shit government organization deny you access to drugs, any drugs if you wish so and especially drugs that are known to be effective and are in use in the rest of the world?

      The reason we have the regulations we have by the FDA is because we tried working without them and, unsurprisingly, people died and a lot of unscrupulous hucksters made a lot of money.

      - no, the reason you have FDA being what it is, is because it has enormous power, which translates into dollars for monopolies, who kill off the small competitors and make sure prices never fall.

      We have the same thing going on now with homeopathic medicine.

      - there is no reason for FDA to get involved into this homeopathic stuff, especially since it is just placebo.

      What we need are good, functional, and smarter regulations, not merely fewer or more regulations.

      - seriously? You truly believe that? You truly want government to regulate your life? To tell you, probably a grown ass man, what you can and cannot use in your life as drugs? To ensure that only monopolies can sell you drugs? To make sure you have to pay a small fortune for any real treatment?

      Please check your facts before posting; this took me all of a minute with a search engine to find in PLoS.

      - I'll give you some facts.

      Here is one. A drug that before FDA approval only cost $10/shot (ten dollars), once approved by FDA was immediately repriced at $1500 dollars a shot (one thousand five hundred dollars), as FDA granted a monopoly to the producer company, so nobody could compete with them. This is for a drug that people need to take 20 times, so that's $30,000 for the 20 times instead of $200 as it was prior to FDA 'approval' - in reality granting a monopoly. The orders of magnitude, by which FDA raises costs to the end users are similar with this drug.

      And yes, it only takes an Internet search.

  21. Re:Why are app stores their only option? by Sique · · Score: 2

    Patents are valid for twenty or twenty-five years, depending on where you live. And I don't see a problem with copying someone else's idea per se. That's called learning from others, and it's one of the most important aspects of culture. Every child starts learning by copying their parents. Every apes and even dogs and birds do. Copying others is a natural thing to do.
    The waters get muddy when people start to get in each others way by copying ideas, when the profits (real or ideational ones) from using an idea start to get distributed in a way that feels unfair compared with the amount of creativity and effort each person had put into the idea. But that's a completely different kettle of fish.

    --
    .sig: Sique *sigh*
  22. Re:Why are app stores their only option? by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 2

    Patents are valid for 20 years if, and only if, you pay the yearly extension fees. In most cases, they are not paid for the whole 20 years, hence the 7 year average. Besides, the patent system does not at all impede your learning from others. If you want to profit, though, you have to improve on what you learned.

    --
    Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
  23. Re:This tweet (FTFA) shows how screwed up it is. by Solandri · · Score: 2

    Yeah, half a penny per dollar app? That's clearly outrageous.

    Multiply it by a couple hundred lawyers waving threats of patent litigation and you'll start to see the problem.