5 ms·

I don't think it's flippant at all, indeed, my impression is that it's widely considered the only practical approach to dealing with software patents if you're

I don't think it's flippant at all, indeed, my impression is that it's widely considered the only practical approach to dealing with software patents if you're not an enormous company that can devote significant resources to patent research. Unfortunately software patents, as implemented in the U.S. especially, are a morass full of landmines and predators, and offering little of value. By and large the patent holders (both legitimate and illegitimate) tend to stick to trying to extract money from rich players (which is mostly the large companies that do have the resources to care about patents) and/or making patent-exchange deals to protect themselves. Unless you have a lot of money to throw around, it's a game you can't win, and any attempt to deal with the system at face-value is a pointless waste of scarce resources.

the_why_of_y 11y ago
Indeed. "Ignoring Patents", Mark A. Lemley http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=999961 http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=999961 What's going on here? The answer, I think, is quite simple: both researchers and companies in component industries simply ignore patents. Virtually everyone does it. They do it at all stages of endeavor. From the perspective of an outsider to the patent system, this is a remarkable fact. And yet it may be what prevents the patent system from crushing innovation in component industries like IT. Ignoring patents, then, may be a "workaround" that allows the innovation system to function in the face of overbroad patent protection.