Almost Every Company Is A Software Company
from the customization dept
I noted last summer that the New York Times launched a new blog called Open about the use of open source technologies at the paper. On Tuesday the blog had a post about a new Perl profiler that they developed in-house and are releasing to the world. I'm not in the market for a Perl profiler, but I thought it was striking that the New York Times, a firm that a decade ago was totally clueless about the web, is now producing non-trivial free software projects. What I think this illustrates is that the common conception that software is something that comes in a box you buy at Best Buy is rather misguided. An enormous number of programmers are employed in organizations we don't think of as software firms, developing custom applications for the internal use of their employers. In a sense, every company of non-trivial size is a software company.In fact, I'm composing this post in a custom CMS developed specifically for the Techdirt Insight Community. And this, I think, is one of the things that makes software patents so dangerous. A firm doesn't have to worry that its fleet of company cars infringe patents; that's generally the responsibility of the car manufacturers. In a healthy patent system, companies should only have to worry about patents in their own line of business. But when a company "manufactures" a software product for internal use, they suddenly have to worry about whether their internal software might be violating some patents. Indeed, the End Software Patents project has pointed out that companies as diverse as the Green Bay Packers, Kraft Foods, and Ford Motors have been hit by software patent lawsuits in recent years. The reality is that software isn't just an industry, it's becoming a fundamental tool for manipulating information about the world. Policies that implicitly assume that only a few companies in Silicon Valley and Seattle are "software companies" are going to cause major problems.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Technoogies
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Always been known in the corporate world
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
SaaS
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
open source patent infringment?
What if I/we develop some open source software and put it out either in public domain or GPL. Then someone comes around and says, "we have a patent that your software infringes upon." Let's say the overlap is fairly obvious and extensive.
What happens next? I/we have no revenue stream from this software. We may be a fairly distributed international community of developers. There may be lots of copies out there, and those copies may be developing mutant spawn.
Does the patent holder have any rights here? Does the patent holder have any legitimate financial claims against a community of open source developers?
And what is the practical outcome? Can software source that has been replicated out on many servers be recalled? Can varients of this software be stopped? How is this toothpaste retubed?
Perhaps this has already happened in more or more cases I don't know about; perhaps this is a situation waiting to happen.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: open source patent infringment?
What happens next? I/we have no revenue stream from this software. We may be a fairly distributed international community of developers. There may be lots of copies out there, and those copies may be developing mutant spawn.
Does the patent holder have any rights here? Does the patent holder have any legitimate financial claims against a community of open source developers?
In that case, the patent holder could go after the developers, but will more likely go after anyone using the open source software in a commercial manner (see what SCO did to DaimlerChrysler as an example).
And what is the practical outcome? Can software source that has been replicated out on many servers be recalled? Can varients of this software be stopped? How is this toothpaste retubed?
It is difficult to retube (and perhaps pointless), but patent holders will try and will threaten to sue anyone who uses the infringing software, creating a liability that will likely scare off many companies from using it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thieving Swine
See, there you go with your business-hostile Commie ideas again. Don't you realize that patents are valuable, precisely because of the payments we can extract from unwitt^H^H^H^H^H^Hlicensees like you? So the more such patents we can take out, the more wealth we get out of the economy, and the more we can HELP KEEP AMERICA GREAT!!!
This idea that software patents, or patents of any sort, could stifle innovation, is just crazy talk. After all, the number of patents is an absolutely key measure of the innovation in an economy, so the more patents we have, it self-evidently follows that the more innovative our economy must be. ANYBODY WHO DISAGREES IS IPSO FACTO COMMUNIST!!! End of story.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bill Gates a communist?
"This idea that software patents, or patents of any sort, could stifle innovation, is just crazy talk"
Bill Gates, 1991:
"If people had understood how patents would be granted when most of today's ideas were invented and had taken out patents, the industry would be at a complete standstill today."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thanks
Recent community response has all but guaranteed that other developers here will have the companies support if they want to contribute code back to the community.
Thanks again!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
New talk from Bill Gates
[ link to this | view in chronology ]