Although IBM's move is welcome, it's not as immediately helpful as it might seem. The standard advice for programmers and designers trying to avoid patent conflicts in new software is "don't" - because patent law and practice is a minefield for the non-lawyer, a Humpty Dumpty world where trying hard with the best will in the world can cost you far more than not trying at all. Designing software that uses techniques from IBM's list will remove some risk, but unless lots of other companies join in there is still substantial danger in open innovation. That's one of the joys of software patents -- each design decision in a single piece of code can potentially infringe.
IBM needs to go further. As a member of EICTA, it remains publicly committed to a strong software patent regime in Europe: a strange position for a company simultaneously trying to negate the dangers of the American system. At the least, it needs to make its European position consistent with today's action -- and the time to do so is now, as momentum builds within the European Union for a complete rethink on the issue.
The best effect that IBM's decision could have is on other proprietary software companies. If IBM, which makes more than $1bn a year from IP licensing, is prepared to make that big a bet on open systems, how much could the others lose from sticking to the old ways? Gates should reconsider: any world view which sees IBM as a communist organisation is dangerously skewed and needs a reality adjustment. The world won't wait for Microsoft to catch up.
Talkback
Isn't it just business?
To depend on MS seems to be just stupid, so the Open Source alternative looks more and more attractive each day passing, especially for companies tired of Microsoft's insecure and expensive alternatives.
This has thrown a spanner in the works for bill's litigation plans against open source!! Hooray!!! On Ya IBM!!, I don't agree with with software patents, but this move will at least tie us across for now! At least, if M$$ & other evil nasties will have to think twice before they attack open source with patent litigation.
This is a momment in History! This is the year Open Source starts to give M$ a peptic ulcer, a slow but painful demise of the greedy M$ monopoly.
The More M$ makes me angry, the harder I push open source to all my clients, "delete that M$ Office & install Open Office on as many systems as possible, Or I give out more Live Linux CDs!
I hate tio burst Ricardo's bubble, but it won't stop others from litigating against Open Source. It means that anybody using code which impinges on the IBM Patents and releasing the resultant code as Open Source, won't be litigated against.
If you impinge on patents from Microsoft's stable (as an obvious example), then you will still probably face litigation (depending on how big you are and how much money they think your product will make.
It also doesn't help small companies writing bespoke software which isn't open source (their customers may not want their trade secrets revealed to all and sundry).
And the problem for most small companies is that their customers won't pay for a couple of years of patent research to ensure their programs aren't infringing any patents, their first knowledge of infringing a patent will probably be when the lawyers come-a-knocking.