Small businesses are being failed by the patent system, according to Andrew Gowers, the man leading an independent review into intellectual property law in the UK.
SMEs are a disadvantage when applying for patents because of the expense of having a patent awarded, Gowers told ZDNet UK on Thursday.
"The cost of protecting IP rights for UK firms is an issue — we're looking to find practical ways of reducing it," said Gowers.
Gowers was attending a seminar in London, where he also said that some companies were using patents to prevent other firms from developing new products.
The UK Patent Office (UKPO) also said there was a need for the patent system to be reformed because of the complexity of patent law.
"The complexity can affect an SME. We must work to make the system simple and accessible, yet robust enough for the patent to hold up if challenged," said Ron Marchant, UKPO's chief executive.
"There is also a need for operational reform in duplication of effort internationally. Each country you apply for a patent in incurs costs for the same work, and it's a resource hungry process. It's very expensive and unnecessary, and can be a barrier for international patenting for Web-based SMEs with access to selling across the globe," Marchant continued.
Microsoft also called for better collaboration between patent offices around the world, but said it doubted there would be international consensus over patent legislation.
"In the UK we don't believe there's the political will to have an EU-wide system of patents," said Chris Parker, senior director of law and corporate affairs for Microsoft.
Microsoft also said it would throw its weight behind the interests of SMEs, as this would benefit both business and society.
"Microsoft is extremely interested in helping SMEs to protect innovation, because that's one of the key drivers of expanding knowledge. We think the benefits for business and society in general are compelling, and we'll do everything possible to prime the pump," said Parker.
Microsoft called for the government to provide incentives for SMEs to pursue patents. "We think tax credits are really important to protect SME intellectual-property rights at the outset."
But the London School of Economics (LSE) was more cautious about reforming current patent legislation. "Streamlining the process is not unambiguously a superior move," said Danny Quah, professor of economics at LSE. "There is a danger that companies that win patents are those with the best lawyers rather than the best engineers."
"If the government were to provide incentives for patent production, the danger is that successful companies would become the ones with a good legal department rather than the best engineers," Quah explained.
The creation of monopolies had to be balanced against the benefits to creativity, said Quah.
"Strong intellectual-property rights encourage the use of legal weapons, because forces in the system encourage litigation. We need more evidence before making a decision to streamline the process, as it will lead to more monopolies in the system. We have to balance the trade-off with potentially higher creativity."
Gowers said that SMEs have gaps in their knowledge about how patents can increase revenue that need to be addressed.
"There appears to be a low level of awareness among SMEs about the value of intellectual property to their business — with perceptions about the high cost and complexity of obtaining and defending intellectual property rights that imply they are the preserve of large corporations. This is something we are interested in remedying," said Gowers.
Talkback
Just look at the mess that "more accessible" patents have created in the US. The Blackberry mess, the JPG fiasco and there is Balthauser and the AJAX/Flash/PDF/Javascript patent.
The absurd thing is that the patent holders can screw millions of dollars out of other companys and then when their patents are ruled invalid they do NOT have to give the money back.
If patents are ever going to be a success then the invention must be genuinely new. It is unlikely that any of Microsoft's patents would survive that test.
Just look at the mess that "more accessible" patents have created in the US. The Blackberry mess, the JPG fiasco and there is Balthauser and the AJAX/Flash/PDF/Javascript patent.
The absurd thing is that the patent holders can screw millions of dollars out of other companys and then when their patents are ruled invalid they do NOT have to give the money back.
If patents are ever going to be a success then the invention must be genuinely new. It is unlikely that any of Microsoft's patents would survive that test.
IP Patents should be dropped all together to allow easier access for all involved. This route has allowed stupid patent aplications to proceed which merely inhibit freemarket competition.
http://randomfoo.net/oscon/2002/lessig/free.html
Lawrence Lessig has been argueing for freer copyright and IP laws for years.
99.9999999 percent of patent litigation involves software patents !!
For a century or more harware patents were easier to enforce and easier to validate.
Then came along "The Troublemaker"
Software patents are like a pandora's box because you never know if one or 2 key lines of code was used by Joe Blow a year earlier.
Joe is unaware of the new patent being filed that uses his code and the patent office can't search billions of lines of code to validate prior art.
So years later Joe Blow finds out the newly issued patents violated his codes years earlier which he much show proof in the way of litigation and compensation.
Solution, do not patent software but issue copywrites instead.
Further for small companies ::::
Write and file your own patents. You can do it. You don't need a Patent attorney, but of course the patent attornies will be furious with me disclosing this !!
When the patents come back with comments and look like they will be issued.
NOW get a patent attorney to clean up the patent wording, drawings, and talking with PTO.
Attorneys are not inventors and when they have to invent your patent it drives the cost up tens of thousands of dollars.
Doing your own patent filing saves tens of thousands and goes much faster.