Lynne Kiesling quoting WSJ in Knowledge Problem today…
The technology company announced today a pledge that it hopes will establish a sort of “patent commons” on which open-source software developers can base their code.
The pledge amounts to a promise that IBM, one of the staunchest backers of the Linux operating system among major computer makers, won’t enforce any of 500 designated patents against makers of open-source software. IBM has promoted Linux in part to blunt the dominance of Microsoft Corp. as it has tried to spread its operating systems to the corporate-computing world.
She goes on to explain…
By continuing to file patents, IBM indicates that it believes that the expected future value of the patented idea outweighs the discounted present value of the cost of acquiring the patent. That idea is not inconsistent with yesterday’s decision to stop enforcing particular patents, a move that indicates that the value to IBM of the patented idea being used in open source development is higher than its use in proprietary R&D and applications. They retain the property right, but they choose not to enforce it.
…and to conclude…
something has been beneficially destroyed here — the coupling of the patent right and the enforcement effort. They are two separate issues. Perhaps this shows a new way to reconcile patents and open source. Or maybe not.
Patents and open source, profit and commons. Ownership and self-interest are maintained, boundaries and body intact. AND… value, profit and well-being are maximized by offering, sharing and taking credit in commons, communities and markets. This is exactly the kind of mutuality that we must and will be developing more and more, as businesses feed communities for profit and community activists come together in markets like the small Change News Network.