None for you, but good for us?

Summary: Kaspersky Lab shows that its stance on software patents (and the patent system in general) is not as strong as it claims

Kaspersky, which is based in Russia and is certainly no ally of the US, turns out to be pursing US-style software patents, despite Kaspersky (the chief) publicly slamming the patent system on numerous occasions. Kaspersky might try to argue that it does this for defensive purposes (the same excuse Google uses as it continues to hoard software patents), especially now that Microsoft-connected patent aggressors shake down security companies, but overall it shows that Kaspersky isn't too serious about change or reform. It doesn't play a role in it.

Meanwhile, as this London-based patent lawyers' blog reminds us, software patents' validity is being diminished in the US, with potential implications in Europe. "Coupled with the relatively restrictive (or realistic) ruling on patentability of software in Alice v CLS," it says, "the question is asked whether this is a sea-change or merely a blip in the annual statistics, which will soon be corrected by regression to the norm. In Europe, ongoing work on fixing the procedural rules and institutional infrastructure of the Unified Patent Court has provided a major focal point for litigation interest."

Kaspersky would be wise to stop wasting time and money acquiring patents. Developers need to focus on good programming and secure algorithms, not typing up papers to be submitted to lawyers for the acquisition of monopolies. Mr. Kaspersky ought to change his company's policy to coincide with a computer scientist's common sense. Besides, software patents may already be on their way out (bulk invalidation). ⬆