« Les inventions, pour parvenir à l’état pratique, se font par étapes successives, souvent dans des contrées différentes et par les soins et l’initiative de plusieurs personnes. Pourquoi et de quel droit le dernier venu dans la série de ces esprits inventifs s’attribuerait-il le profit du labeur de tous les autres et recevrait un brevet qui lui en donnerait le monopole ? »

Source: Michel Chevalet, major de l’X en 1829

Rapports du Conseil d’Analyse Economique pour constater les dérives récentes de la protection de la propriété intellectuelle,par Jean Tirole, Claude Henry, Michel Trommetter et Laurence Tubiana, Bernard Caillaud

La dérive des brevets par Claude Henry, professeur à l’X

À quoi servent les brevets ? par Pierre Jarillon
Continuer la lecture de Les dérives de la propriété intellectuelle →

Yahoo sues Facebook over software patent infringement [0]. Patent litigation becomes the most destructive force for web enterprises. Software patents were still uncommon 15 years ago.

Since 1999 we advocate about the risks of software patenting and fully agree with Christina Mulligan and Timothy B. Lee arguments [1] : « There’s no easily searchable database for software ideas — it’s not like cross-checking chemical formulas, which are easily indexable. » . Lee and Mulligan argue quite rightly that there’s no good way to create a convenient database for software patents. In other words trying to check for a patent infringement is all but impossible for developers.

Software patents are utterly impractical to promote innovation. Here are a few American articles that we recommend you to read to broaden your clear understanding of numerous and inextricable software patents issues. The multiplication of insane litigations is an additional proof that software patents are an inadequate tool. In reality the patent establishment is the main pushing force towards software patentability in Europe with the support of some major IT companies. Their main and sad aim is not to promote but to impede technology and distort markets.

In september 2011 James Bessen, Jennifer Ford and Michael J. Meurer [2] have published a 35 pages article : The Private and Social Costs of Patent Trolls. With accuracy they confirm the pure insanity of software patents : »In the past, non-practicing entities (NPEs) — firms that license patents without producing goods — have facilitated technology markets and increased rents for small inventors. Is this also true for today’s NPEs? Or are they “patent trolls” who opportunistically litigate over software patents with unpredictable boundaries? Using stock market event studies around patent lawsuit filings, we find that NPE lawsuits are associated with half a trillion dollars of lost wealth to defendants from 1990 through 2010, mostly from technology companies. Moreover, very little of this loss represents a transfer to small inventors. Instead, it implies reduced innovation incentives and a net loss of social welfare. »

Recently Timothy B. Lee [3] emphasizes the following calamitous aspect : »Patents are often described as “intellectual property” and patent law provides for harsh property-like remedies against patent infringers. But a property system that is so convoluted that ordinary firms can’t figure out who owns what isn’t a property system at all. Genuine property rights enhance economic efficiency by bringing predictability to the allocation of scarce resources and thereby promoting decentralized decision-making. Software patents retard economic efficiency by subjecting software firms to a constant and unavoidable threat of litigation for accidentally infringing the patent rights of others. Hayek would not have approved. »
Continuer la lecture de Impractical Software patents →