Nov 13

There has been a lot of talk about software patents lately, more so than normal. I am sure a lot of the patent noise is due to the EU considering something termed "Unlimited Patentability".

Add to that some of the silly patents that the US is allowing, stuff like "Software Installation/Updating over the Internet" and "Password Management", and patents do seem to be headed in the wrong direction. The ability to patent something so generic is, in my opinion, abusive.

What's worse, it seems like the patent office is just passing these generic "blankets" through the system without a second thought. Requiring a tremendous effort from people with prior art to overturn the new patent. Which, I have to admit, I have yet to hear of.

Considering all this, it will sound strange to you that I think software patents are going to be the only thing that will save the software industry. Now don't get me wrong, I don't mean that these generic patents are our saving grace. I do think, however, that traditional patents, specifically crafted patents, will help us make it into the future.

It's no doubt that you have read at least one article about the future of software development, post-dotcom. Before the year 2000, software development was a huge open space, and it almost seemed that it could never be filled. Every company in existence needed custom software, and they either contracted the work out, hired a team of developers, or did both.

But now things look quite different. The software market is saturated; companies are turning their backs on custom software and as a result are dropping their developers on the floor. Worse yet, it seems like the more employees that get laid off, the higher a company's stock price goes up.

We are at a point where everyone seems to have the software they need to do there job. And when this is not the case, the software they do need is readily available, from at least three different software companies. Again, the market is saturated, and software houses are just churning out mutations of existing software, just trying to stay afloat.

From what I see, software almost has no value. If it has any value at all, it is probably the same amount that a bag of potato chips has. Many companies have recognized that their software has no additional value over their competitors, and as a result, converted from a software company to a hardware or a services company.

There is at least a handful of companies here in the front range that no longer sell their software, but instead, offer a "network appliance" with their software pre-installed. Then there are the software companies that now only sell a "service" that includes the use of their software, but only as a utility. No direct access to the software is allowed.

Why would all these companies go through the trouble of obscuring the fact that what they are really selling is software? Because software has no value. No matter how hard you try, no matter what technology you use or invent, your competition is only one step behind you.

In software, one step is not that far away. Before you know it, your competition has not only caught up to you, but left you in the dust. There is nothing you can develop that can't be done by another team of developers in half the time. Nothing.

To understand this, you have to take a serious look at who your competition is. In the software market, almost everyone is competition. If IBM, Novel or Microsoft see value in your product, chances are they will duplicate the idea and be able to push it through their existing sales channels before you have a chance to blink.

If just one open source software developer finds value in your software, but does not want to pay what you have on the price tag, you have to deal with a free (as in price and in source code) implementation. It really doesn't matter if the open source version does not come with support, or lacks a few features. Chance are, your competition, or even your end users can fill in the blanks.

How can we compete in this environment? Do we start selling hardware solutions that utilize our software? Should we start selling a service based on what our software can do? Or do we patent our software?

What do you think software development will look like in 5 years?