4 ms·

Wait... why wouldn't you release it to the world?

by y3di 15y ago

brador 15y ago
Because there's no gain in doing so. Look, as soon as it's released, it will be copied by those who already have market penetration in that space, leaving the big USP of "cool software feature" as something useless, and no longer a USP. Instead of releasing them out, which is what I'd like to do, I just keep them to myself. Something which I would rather not do, but I see no other way of gaining value from them.
- cobrausn 15y ago
  This underscores an oft-ignored important part of the patent system, which is that it encourages people to make their discoveries known to others by patenting them in exchange for temporary monopoly. If the patent were completely unavailable as an option, many would be tempted to hide or obscure their discoveries and methodology for as long as possible to make a profit, so there is at least an argument to be made for patents serving the public interest in the long term. Unfortunately, temporary often ends up being effectively forever when it comes to software, and the system has been gamed by lawyers. Sigh.
- jonknee 15y ago
  Except the software industry is full of stories opposite of your expectations--startups with better ideas who unseat or out maneuver giants. Do you think Mint would have been better off keeping their ideas to themselves? How about Facebook? There are tons of these: Dropbox, Square, Heroku, Twilio, etc etc. Good software is rewarded (even more so in today when there's instant distribution), don't worry about your competitors.
  - brador 15y ago
    Those are innovative products yes, but in new/weak competition spaces. It's a different situation entirely when going head on against a huge competitive with an innovative product. For example, a new, innovative, OS going against Windows. In this case and without software patents, Microsoft would just copy the features that make it special, leaving the R&D investment as a waste, unless software patents are available of course. Edit: Looks like I'm getting downvoted for no reason. Good luck with your collective circlejerk HN. I'm out.
    - ImprovedSilence 15y ago
      >"Looks like I'm getting downvoted for no reason. " Yeah, there seems to be a lot of that these days. People down-vote for disagreement, as opposed to just spammy posts. It's really kinda sad for a community that should be open to discussion and critical thought.
    - brlewis 15y ago
      I'm not one of the downvoters, but I can speculate as to the reason: Perhaps it's because you're using most likely a non-patented browser that fetches a non-patented hypertext format (HTML) via a non-patented application protocol (HTTP) built on a non-patented network stack (TCP) by connecting to a non-patented web server (HN) written in a non-patented programming language (Arc), and you're using this stack to argue that people have no motivation to innovate in software if patent protection is unavailable. Or perhaps it's because you're trotting out that old argument that software patents can help the little guy compete against big players. But so far the only "little guy" success anyone can point to was Stac Electronics, a publicly traded company for whom a $9.7 million sales quarter was evidence of declining business. That's not little: http://articles.latimes.com/1994-06-22/business/fi-7159_1_patent-dispute http://articles.latimes.com/1994-06-22/business/fi-7159_1_pa...
  - FreakLegion 15y ago
    It might be instructive to ask yourself why the software industry is full of stories opposite brador's expectations. For example, consider that by definition, there can be no stories about technologies that have been kept secret. (I dislike software patents myself and agree with you, though, that, for a variety of reasons, we'd still see plenty of innovation without them.)

Wait... why wouldn't you release it to the world?

by y3di 15y ago

Wait... why wouldn't you release it to the world?

Because there's no gain in doing so. Look, as soon as it's released, it will be copied by those who already have market penetration in that space, leaving the big USP of "cool software feature" as something useless, and no longer a USP. Instead of releasing them out, which is what I'd like to do, I just keep them to myself. Something which I would rather not do, but I see no other way of gaining value from them.

cobrausn 15y ago
This underscores an oft-ignored important part of the patent system, which is that it encourages people to make their discoveries known to others by patenting them in exchange for temporary monopoly. If the patent were completely unavailable as an option, many would be tempted to hide or obscure their discoveries and methodology for as long as possible to make a profit, so there is at least an argument to be made for patents serving the public interest in the long term. Unfortunately, temporary often ends up being effectively forever when it comes to software, and the system has been gamed by lawyers. Sigh.
jonknee 15y ago
Except the software industry is full of stories opposite of your expectations--startups with better ideas who unseat or out maneuver giants. Do you think Mint would have been better off keeping their ideas to themselves? How about Facebook? There are tons of these: Dropbox, Square, Heroku, Twilio, etc etc. Good software is rewarded (even more so in today when there's instant distribution), don't worry about your competitors.
- brador 15y ago
  Those are innovative products yes, but in new/weak competition spaces. It's a different situation entirely when going head on against a huge competitive with an innovative product. For example, a new, innovative, OS going against Windows. In this case and without software patents, Microsoft would just copy the features that make it special, leaving the R&D investment as a waste, unless software patents are available of course. Edit: Looks like I'm getting downvoted for no reason. Good luck with your collective circlejerk HN. I'm out.
  - ImprovedSilence 15y ago
    >"Looks like I'm getting downvoted for no reason. " Yeah, there seems to be a lot of that these days. People down-vote for disagreement, as opposed to just spammy posts. It's really kinda sad for a community that should be open to discussion and critical thought.
  - brlewis 15y ago
    I'm not one of the downvoters, but I can speculate as to the reason: Perhaps it's because you're using most likely a non-patented browser that fetches a non-patented hypertext format (HTML) via a non-patented application protocol (HTTP) built on a non-patented network stack (TCP) by connecting to a non-patented web server (HN) written in a non-patented programming language (Arc), and you're using this stack to argue that people have no motivation to innovate in software if patent protection is unavailable. Or perhaps it's because you're trotting out that old argument that software patents can help the little guy compete against big players. But so far the only "little guy" success anyone can point to was Stac Electronics, a publicly traded company for whom a $9.7 million sales quarter was evidence of declining business. That's not little: http://articles.latimes.com/1994-06-22/business/fi-7159_1_patent-dispute http://articles.latimes.com/1994-06-22/business/fi-7159_1_pa...
- FreakLegion 15y ago
  It might be instructive to ask yourself why the software industry is full of stories opposite brador's expectations. For example, consider that by definition, there can be no stories about technologies that have been kept secret. (I dislike software patents myself and agree with you, though, that, for a variety of reasons, we'd still see plenty of innovation without them.)