What will be the future of software technology?

How damaging are software and hardware patents to the future of technology and innovation?

• I understand the reason for intellectual property protectionism by using patents, but in my eyes it's seriously hampering our ability to innovate and advance technology. I don't think the Web 1.0 would have been possible had IP patents been so matured as they are today back in the early 90s.

• Answer:

  They aren't damaging per se. Reality is that it is the misuse of patents that harms technology advancement. Misuse is a two-fold proposition. First is the patenting of items that should not be patents (which the law allows). Congress has begun addressing this issue and the process is beginning to tighten up. One thing that would help is to unify patent laws internationally. Second, is the misuse of patents by patent owners to stifle innovation and competition. One aspect is the so-called patent troll. The second is the use of FRAND patents by firms such as Samsung to block competitors from the market place either through denial of access to the FRAND patent or by charging unfair licensing rates. That issue is being looked at my both the courts and regulatory bodies in the US and Europe. To address the remainder of your question, first, the Internet would most likely be what it currently is now. Why? Because it was developed initially for DARPA. As such, it became public property. Much of the subsequent development has occurred under government auspices or as a part of FRAND patents. Patents, as you have suggested, are a necessary legal device to protect inventors from having their inventions stolen by others. By the virtue of being protected, inventors have the ability to recoup the costs of invention and the opportunity to profit as well. They can do so by licensing their invention for a licensing fee. Because they are licensed, inventors are free to share patent details with all wanting the information. This allows others to expand on the base invention and to develop uses for patented technologies that might not make the market otherwise. Without patents, inventors would instead have an incentive to withhold patent details in order to protect the details of development. And, agreements to share the technology or invention would restrict additional development and uses as well as sharing of information. We see this now in some technologies that people hold as proprietary.  A couple of examples include the formulas for Coca Cola and many computer chips. Because of FRAND patents, the world benefits by having robust cellular telephony with a high degree of interoperability. Without patent sharing, we might have as many as 8-10 separate telephone systems which, if they could be cross connected may not work well together. FRAND = Fair Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory refers to standards essential patents that companies agree to license to every one at a fair and reasonable price DARPA = Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency Patent trolls = firms that own patents but do nothing to develop either the technology or use it to develop products. Their sole purpose is to use patents to sue firms that utilize the patented or similar technology in the hope of earning a financial windfall from the lawsuit.