Showing posts with label commentary. Show all posts
Showing posts with label commentary. Show all posts

Monday, July 25, 2011

This American Life: NPE Issue Going Mainstream

I tweeted a link to this Planet Money article a few days ago. The companion audio program from This American Life is now available online.

I wish I could say the program was inaccurate or sensationalist. It's not. As someone who worked on the fringes of NPE-world for a good number of years, I was surprised at how well the story was reported.

Even when I was certain that their "patent on toast" anecdote was a misreading based on a patent title instead of the claims, I checked, and sure enough, the claims required just a temperature and a time within certain ranges.

Most notable for me, though, was the portion where the reporters were questioning Peter Detkin about the assignment records of a patent IV itself has presented as embodying their "help the inventors" ethos. The reporters seemed genuinely confused by assignment of the patent to what sounded to anyone in the NPE business like IV shell companies.

Rather than say, "oh, those are just shell companies we use for acquisitions," Detkin became surprisingly defensive and evasive. Later, in a follow-up interview, perhaps having sensed the PR implications of his earlier responses, Detkin softened and admitted the strangely named companies were IV's.

When Detkin is "on," he impressively and articulately argues the case that IV is not evil. When the usually-smooth Detkin starts sounding defensive and testy, though, you start wondering if IV is getting worried. (I was reminded a bit of RIM co-CEO Lazaridis' meltdown. Testy execs can be a signal of impending problems.)

As public awareness and outrage over NPE issues grow, there will be an opening to push for reform. It is possible to mitigate these problems. However, as long as the sophistication of the arguments lingers at "software patents are bad," the interests of developers will not have meaningful impact.

I'll try to write more on that later.

 

 

Sunday, May 15, 2011

Lodsys v. Apple Devs: FUD for the App Store Era?

Is the threat of patent litigation being used to plant fear, uncertainty, and doubt in an attempt to sway developers away from Apple?

As reported earlier, multiple developers have received demand letters from Lodsys over US7,222,078.  One of the developers is James Thomson, developer of DragThing and PCalc.  Thomson reports, "In the claim against pCalc, it was the 59p "Theme Pack" they used in their example.  This isn't just about 'upgrade to full version'".

Patent litigation is expensive.  A 59p "Theme Pack," regardless of the weakness of the US dollar, is not.  No offense intended to James Thomson, but I don't think he's getting rich selling calculator theme packs.  In fact, I wonder whether, applying a reasonable royalty to those theme packs, the expected damages would cover the cost of sending the demand letter via FedEx to Scotland.

So, what motivation would Lodsys have to threaten my favorite purveyor of calculator apps?

The most benign explanation is that the iPhone with iOS by itself does not provide a viable infringement theory.  To have the supposedly offending in-app purchase, you need an app.  Perhaps the developers are being targeted just to add the necessary elements for an infringement case that's really against Apple.  Collateral damage.

Another possibility exists, however.  As Steve Ballmer famously asserted (and then failed to heed), this business is about "developers, developers, developers."  Apple owns a large chunk of developer mindshare.  Competitors are struggling to keep developer interest as the conventional wisdom is becoming: "You make money with iOS, not Android [or WebOS, or Windows Phone, or Symbian...]"

What effect would the fear of patent litigation have on the iOS developer community?  Would developers risk deploying an app with limited revenue potential if the prospect of tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars of litigation expense loomed and Apple was not covering their backs?

Perhaps this really is just about making a little bit of money from a lot of different people.  Perhaps, however, it is about something more.  It's hard to say until we know who is really behind Ferrara Ethereal and Lodsys.

 

Related Coverage: