

Why We Need An Independent Invention Defense - cwan
http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2010/01/why-we-need-an-independent-invention-defense.html

======
scottdw2
Personally, I don't value software parents much.

I think they are a giant waste of money. You spend $20K on lawyers, to get
nothing more than the right to spend more money on lawyers in the future.

That $20K could be better invested elsewhere (like on product improvement).

I think it would be worth considering eliminating software patents.

However, I don't think an "independent invention defense" is a good idea. It
would essentially eliminate all patent protection. Basically, the absence of
proof that you knew a patent existed, would get you off the hook for
infringing on it. This means that as long as you had the right set of rigorous
policies in place, you could operate with complete immunity from patent
infringement claims.

If all employees were trained (by mandatory corporate training) that "under no
circumstances should you ever read any patents, ever", and "if you ever have
any doubts about anything being patentable, direct the question to our
lawyer", and you were very strict about enforcing it, you could make a case
that pretty much every invention was discovered independently.

That would defeat the whole purpose of patent protection. The idea is that by
getting inventors to disclose details of their invention (which benefits
society), that they get a monopoly on its use. Without the monopoly, there is
no point in having a patent.

If software patents pose a fundamental problem, then I think the best course
of action is to eliminate software parents, not to undermine the entire patent
system.

