Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

IBM Locking Up Lots of Cloud Computing Patents

Posted by Soulskill on from the bulking-up-before-a-fight dept.

dkatana writes: In an article for InformationWeek Charles Babcock notes that IBM has been hoarding patents on every aspect of cloud computing. They've secured about 1,200 in the past 18 months, including ~400 so far this year. "For those who conceive of the cloud as an environment based on public standards with many shared elements, the grant of these patents isn't entirely reassuring." Babcock says, and he adds: "Whatever the intent, these patents illustrate how the cloud, even though it's conceived of as a shared environment following public standards, may be subject to some of the same intellectual property disputes and patent trolling as earlier, more directly proprietary environments."

8 of 70 comments (clear)

  1. If you can't beat 'em... by cb88 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Become SCO!

    1. Re:If you can't beat 'em... by AchilleTalon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not exactly. Given the threat the patent trolls represents, it is of good advice for a company to patent as much as possible its own contributions and inventions in order to not have to throw the shareholders' money at lawsuits initiated by the patent trolls companies. If you were the IBM CEO you wouldn't do otherwise. It may appear outrageous, but the first responsability of the CEO is to protect the money of the shareholders and make it profitable. Clearly, getting the patents will protect the shareholders' money.

      --
      Achille Talon
      Hop!
    2. Re:If you can't beat 'em... by LessThanObvious · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is why none of this should be patent eligible. It's harmful to allow software to be patented especially when the patent is overly broad and general in it's language. It's harmful to allow any configuration of systems and software to be patented. The USPTO is completely incapable of telling the difference between what's patent worthy and what's bullshit in these areas.

    3. Re:If you can't beat 'em... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      IBM HAD good products. most of their current products are poor shadows of their former glory days. They cobble together mismatched open source, propriety tech and slap a new name and interface on it and sell it for inflated costs while requiring teams of consultants to even get basic functionality out of it. Once upon a time when in doubt you went IBM, nowadays if you go IBM you better have a fucking good reason!

  2. the cloud is just a computer by turkeydance · · Score: 3, Insightful

    and it's not yours.

  3. They beat themselves by fyngyrz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    the first responsability of the CEO is to protect the money of the shareholders and make it profitable

    Exactly right. Add just a smidgen of shortsightedness and some pressure from the board, and you have the perfect storm of next-quarter-itis.

    After a few quarters like that, the CEO takes off for the next company, as the company tries to put out the fires they left behind them -- fired experts, cheapened and crippled products, new hires that don't know much about the domain, insufficiently-tested but out-the-door-anyway products...

    Yeah, responsibility to the shareholders. Which means: Short term thinking and cannibalistic profiteering. That's the US corporate mantra, right there.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  4. "public standards"? by darkain · · Score: 4, Insightful

    since when the hell is "the cloud" based around "public standards"!?!?!? Each and every major vendor's offerings are pretty much unique and proprietary. vSphere isnt EC2 isnt SmartOS isnt KVM isnt HyperV isnt OpenCompute. Some of these are more open than others while some are entirely closed systems.

  5. Re:This cloud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What about when you need a huge bunch of CPUs to compute something?

    Actually that's the grid. The buzzword that preceded the cloud.

    The cloud is just a way for companies with too much money and not enough brains to spin up large numbers of servers they don't need to then sit idle hosting websites nobody visits. This is my bread and butter, selling websites and virtual servers (in the cloud) to people who don't need them. It's obvious from looking at my customers near-empty weblogs that they're pissing their money away, but the web designers and site administrators like myself get paid regardless. I have evidence that these sites could be multi-tenanted 100:1 , because I also offer that as a product, but these guys insist that their website is the best thing ever, and needs it's own virtual server.

    I hate my job, I hate what I do, I hate how pointless it is, but it's the only way I have to get paid, so I'm not going to stop this idiocy as long as the customers keep on asking for it. A man's got to eat.