Ever wonder why Apple pulls the patent case card with its competitors? You can thank the great Steve Jobs for that. Steve Jobs vowed to be ruthless with its patents ever since Apple lost its case to Creative Technology in 2006 Steve Jobs said “patent it all,”
Patents for software and some kinds of electronics, particularly smartphones, are now so problematic that they contribute to a so-called patent tax that adds as much as 20 percent to companies’ research and development costs, according to a study conducted last year by two Boston University professors.
Supporters of suits initiated by Apple say that the litigation is vital to the company’s success and that Apple is sued far more often than it sues, as do all major tech firms.
“If we can’t protect our intellectual property, then we won’t spend millions creating products like the iPhone,” a former Apple executive said, noting that some of Apple’s patents, like the “slide to unlock” feature on the iPhone, took years to perfect. The concept “might seem obvious now, but that’s only after we spent millions figuring it out,” the executive said. “Other companies shouldn’t be able to steal that without compensating us. That’s why the patent system exists.”
But others challenge that logic, given the huge profits the technology industry enjoys. Apple collects more than $1 billion a week in iPhone and related sales. “I am skeptical whether patents are needed in the software industry to provide adequate incentives,” Judge Posner wrote in an e-mail.
One consequence of all this litigation, policy makers and academics say, is that patent disputes are suffocating the culture of start-ups that has long fueled job growth and technological innovation.
“Think of the billions of dollars being flushed down the toilet,” said Ms. Heinen, the former Apple general counsel, who left the company and paid $2.2 million in connection with a federal investigation of stock option backdating. “When patent lawyers become rock stars, it’s a bad sign for where an industry is heading,” she said, adding that she had no issue with the lawyers themselves.
[nytimes]
smart – hov