Welcome to MSDN Blogs Sign in | Join | Help

Patents and XML

There has been plenty of discussion recently on patents filed by Microsoft in the area of XML for Office XML Schema and XML based scripting. A search of the patent office's database shows that those that contain XML in the title and those that just reference XML as a technology continue to be submitted from numerous different companies across the software industry at an increasing rate. The patent process serves an important role - to ensure that innovation is spread throughout society by openly sharing knowledge, whilst at the same time protecting the investment of those who have put the time and effort into the innovative creation. Without this ability, companies and individuals across all industries would keep information hidden so as not to be upserted by a competitor. On the whole for society to progress in a competitive environment patents are a necessary thing. Of course there are the ones that you wished that you have filed first, the useless and the totally bizarre , but patents like art are all subjective in their qualify to improve society. Software innovations are no less patentable then any other creation. It will be interesting to see how the new W3C patent policy affects the future development and innovations of XML technologies in the industry.

Published Tuesday, February 24, 2004 1:32 AM by mfussell
Filed under:

Comments

Tuesday, February 24, 2004 1:39 AM by Ferris Beuller

# re: Patents and XML

WTF is ingenius and patentable on a bloody schema of an OPEN and STANDARD markup format, WTF thats stupid and one I will endeavour to break at every chance I get.

Tuesday, February 24, 2004 1:40 AM by Ferris Beuller

# re: Patents and XML

More and more people are turning theyre back on Americass because of loonacy like this. If its not breaching UN treaties (militarising space, kyoto treaty ignorance the lot) its stupid things like patents.

Tuesday, February 24, 2004 1:41 AM by Ferris Beuller

# re: Patents and XML

Im gona pack some popcorn and watch the Americass isolate and impload itself its gona be one of those kodak moments.

Tuesday, February 24, 2004 1:43 AM by Ferris Beuller

# re: Patents and XML

Good news, in Europe we can reverse engineer according to DIRECTIVEs for interoperation and so on. We are covered by Europe wide law (a directive that cannot be ignored by member states).

Could make a business model out of reverse engineering in europe as other countries forbid it yet we encourage it :D woo yay.

Tuesday, February 24, 2004 1:45 AM by Ferris Beuller

# re: Patents and XML

Patenting on open standards will not succeed. We will either A) create a new standard or B) just ignore your ass.

Tuesday, February 24, 2004 1:46 AM by Ferris Beuller

# re: Patents and XML

Good news, (not for you :D) if you dont provice full compliance with standards for interoperability in Europe, Brussles wont use your shit.

Wahahah:D
Tuesday, February 24, 2004 1:47 AM by Ferris Beuller

# re: Patents and XML

Feel free to make my comments a single post as there is no "edit" functionality.
Tuesday, February 24, 2004 2:15 AM by Jason

# re: Patents and XML

Ferris Beuller apparently has nothing useful to do...
Tuesday, February 24, 2004 2:15 AM by Louis Parks

# re: Patents and XML

Exactly how does the patent system "ensure that innovation is spread throughout society by openly sharing knowledge" ?
Tuesday, February 24, 2004 2:30 AM by Ferris Beuller

# re: Patents and XML

Yes I have nothing to do, just like the blogger who obviously has nothing useful to do except, well, blog.

Tuesday, February 24, 2004 2:30 AM by Ferris Beuller

# re: Patents and XML

Since you are blogging too Jason I would think you have nothing useful to do either.

Cockmungler.
Tuesday, February 24, 2004 7:56 AM by Dennis

# re: Patents and XML

Your argument ignores the fact that the software industry innovated at a rapid rate, shared a lot of knowledge, and made a lot of money, before the courts decided that software was patentable. The fact is, we're granting monopolies on ideas with no economic justification whatsoever.

Software patents are not being used to spread knowledge. No software developer browses through patents looking for ideas, since patents are written in near-impenetrable legalese. Patents are only used to stake a claim on an idea and prevent competitors from developing it further.

It's particularly difficult to make the "spreading knowledge" claim when you're talking about XML formats, not compiled code. What, exactly, is hidden that the patent exposes?

Furthermore, since the patent office is notoriously poor at noticing prior art, and even worse at determining obviousness, I'm faced with a legal framework in which I can't be sure I have the rights to my own ideas. There are numerous broad patents on the sorts of ideas I come up with in the shower.

As a software developer, I say the hell with software patents. I don't need their "protection"...they do me more harm than good. I'll protect myself by continuing to innovate.
Tuesday, February 24, 2004 8:07 AM by Ferris Beuller

# re: Patents and XML

Or how about protecting yourself by making a stable workhorse of a product.
Tuesday, February 24, 2004 8:13 AM by Dennis

# re: Patents and XML

Right. That too. Ideas are a dime a dozen, implementation is the hard part.
Tuesday, February 24, 2004 1:04 PM by Louis Parks

# re: Patents and XML

Implementation is requisite to receiving a patent.

Realistically, you really are saying "the hell" with all patents, not just software patents.
Tuesday, February 24, 2004 1:41 PM by Dennis

# re: Patents and XML

No, Louis, you don't need an implementation. A long time ago you needed a "working model," but not anymore.

One of the most infamous examples is Jerome Lemelson, who long ago filed a patent on using machine vision on an assembly line. He had no idea how to actually implement such a thing, but he kept filing extensions until someone did implement it. Then he hit them up for licensing fees.

http://www.photonics.com/spectra/business/XQ/ASP/businessid.635/QX/read.htm

And yes, I'm skeptical of patents in general, but find them especially bad for software, since the bar for innovation is so low. I come up with patentable ideas on a regular basis. Every decent computer programmer does.

Another point on "spreading knowledge"...software developers actually make a point of *not* reading patents, since damages are trebled if it can be shown you were aware of an infringement. So...how do patents help spread knowledge again?
Tuesday, February 24, 2004 1:44 PM by Dennis

# re: Patents and XML

Another quick point on implementation...in software, if you did need a working model, a small "toy" application would suffice. This is worlds apart from a decent-quality commercial application. That's what I mean when I say implementation is the hard part.
Tuesday, February 24, 2004 2:41 PM by Richard Blewett

# re: Patents and XML

Damn - and there was me thinking *I* had the first ornamental pony tail hat - there goes my millions
Sunday, February 29, 2004 2:42 AM by RichB

# re: Patents and XML

The problem is that patents are expensive. The end result is that the big companies can afford to patent something that has little merit and then threaten to sue all and sundry. A 1-man company or hobbiest doesn't have that free capital and is destined to be at the mercy of the big companies.

Patents are intended to help the little guy compete with the big guys. They are failing in this purpose.

Do you really think that long filenames in VFAT is an innovation? The Microsoft persona has enough problems with it's customer-facing image at the moment without patenting stupid things.

New Comments to this post are disabled
 
Page view tracker