Identifying wrong and side arguments in the current software patent debate

This page will pick arguments in the software patent debate and shortly discuss them, target is to speed up the debate by eliminating all side arguments so the debate can focus on the crucial points. New arguments are on top.

Actually it is just for putting order into my own grasp of the discussion.

SMEs do NOT need patents

"Patents are cheap and easy inquestable", Mr. Betten, CDU Hearing, – 12/05 in Stuttgart

Just have a look at the figures:

1. patent inquest: 500 € and more
2. patent application: 50.000 €
3. patent process: 1.000.000 € and more

Each day aprox. 5 new software patents are added. Of couse the statement of Dr. Betten ist subjective, but it is my personal opinion that his statement is WRONG.

"Patents are in the hand of SMEs*", "There is a chance that* SMEs compete against international enterprises", Mr. Mingorance, SME Intergroup Meeting, 11/05 in Strasbourg

Having a quick look at the top 100 applicants of all granted software patents in the software patent database, you will come to the following summary:

1. 50% of all granted software patents are in the hand of 42 companies
2. The top 100 software patent applicants own together 63% of all software patents

After comparing the applicants with the EICTA memberlist there is another aspect which should be mentioned:

• 37% of all granted software patents belong to EICTA members

Conclusion: The statements of Mr. Mingorance are misleading, because it implicates that more than 50% of all patents are in the hand of !SMEs. If this is what Mr. Mingorance wanted to say the statements are simply WRONG.

"Patents enhance access and are necessary to build business around SMEs", Mr. Mingorance, SME Intergroup Meeting, 11/05 in Strasbourg

This argument has a logical error. If you have 1,2 or 10 patents how can you create a working solution without infringing hundereds of other patents? Even if you are using the patent system like it should be used and you will share the knowledge with others you have to pay for example for every patent you infringe 1% of your turnover then you have nothing left at the end. There are some possibilities to solve this problem:

1. Cross licensing, this can only be done if you have a lot of patents - means you are an enterprise company
2. Selling the patent to a patent troll who sues other companies and gives 20% back to the patent owner
3. Blocking the patent and putting all hope to be bought by a big company

Conclusion: This statement may be true for the rest of the patentable inventions, but it is not practical in the field of software development, so it is simply WRONG.

Copyright IS sufficient to protect innovation

"The Copyright is too weak for SME and universities", Mr. Betten, CDU Hearing, – 12/05 in Stuttgart

This statement is wrong, because of the following reasons:

1. Copyright is self evident, you can go with the result of your work to court to compare it
2. Copyright is applying just in time, without delay by the patent office and without additional cost
3. Copyright protects structures as well, a copy from one programming language to another is a copyright infringement
4. Copyright protects layout as well, if you copy a user interface it is a copyright infringement

Conclusion: Copyright is the only practicable way of protecting intellectual properties and innovation. The statement of Mr. Betten is WRONG.