What if shareholders/investors required companies to show the ROI for their patents? It seems to me that the USPTO has allowed an inordinately high percentage of "bad" business model and software patents (meaning that they get overturned/disallowed on review).
The only way to enforce a patent is through litigation, which is horrendously expensive. This is on top of the expense (and time) of actually getting a patent: Estimates for a US patent are around $15K+; patenting globally can cost >$250K. It can take five years (out of the 20 year life) for the patent to issue. And then it can be overturned.
There are other ways to protect your business model -- as trade secrets, for instance. And you can copyright your software. Both are easier and cheaper than patenting.
And in a patent application, you *have* to tell the world how to implement your "invention". By treating it as a trade secret, it remains, well, SECRET.
Just because you CAN file a patent doesn't mean you SHOULD file a patent. Someone should ask to see the ROI.
In the "mainstream", one sure reason that people will pay for "free" software is convenience.
If you take a bunch of esoteric open source software, and make it easy for them to use it, they will pay.
That is probably the main driver behind the purchase of the retail box versions of popular distros. The model could probably be applied to more specialized open source applications as well.
Slashdot Mirror
I can see it now -- Apple licenses the patent (if there is one), and opens an iClothes store where you can download the latest fashion for $.99.
The basic edition is called "Office 2000". Does everything you need, and a whole lot more.
What if shareholders/investors required companies to show the ROI for their patents? It seems to me that the USPTO has allowed an inordinately high percentage of "bad" business model and software patents (meaning that they get overturned/disallowed on review). The only way to enforce a patent is through litigation, which is horrendously expensive. This is on top of the expense (and time) of actually getting a patent: Estimates for a US patent are around $15K+; patenting globally can cost >$250K. It can take five years (out of the 20 year life) for the patent to issue. And then it can be overturned. There are other ways to protect your business model -- as trade secrets, for instance. And you can copyright your software. Both are easier and cheaper than patenting. And in a patent application, you *have* to tell the world how to implement your "invention". By treating it as a trade secret, it remains, well, SECRET. Just because you CAN file a patent doesn't mean you SHOULD file a patent. Someone should ask to see the ROI.
In the "mainstream", one sure reason that people will pay for "free" software is convenience.
If you take a bunch of esoteric open source software, and make it easy for them to use it, they will pay.
That is probably the main driver behind the purchase of the retail box versions of popular distros. The model could probably be applied to more specialized open source applications as well.