Boycott Kodak, cont.
Groklaw, of course, says it better than I ever could.

Boycott Kodak

I opened up Slashdot this morning and came across this story:

Kodak Wins $1 Billion Java Lawsuit

Kodak claims they hold patents that Java infringes on, and they want $1B in royalties. They haven''t actually won anything yet, Sun will undoubtedly appeal in Federal court, and it's very possible that the whole thing will be tossed out.

Needless to say, Kodak's claims are at best spurious. They're based on some patents they bought from Wang, and those patents are so broad-based and so dependent on prior art that they never should have been awarded in the first place.

This kind of thing is having an increasingly chilling effect on the software industry, and it's not only threatening the livelihood of software developers like me but also the future growth of America's high-tech industry. The need for increasingly sophisticated and innovative software is only going to grow. But if the potential costs of litigation make it cost-ineffective to develop it here, then it will move overseas - especially to places that don't have the incentive or need to conform to our patent laws.

I was so upset I felt compelled to write this letter to Kodak. I have no illusions that anyone there will even read this, and I'm sure that they will pay no attention to those of us who have decided to boycott their products. But I still think it's worth expressing myself.

To whom it may concern -

Several months ago, I bought a Kodak EasyShare CX7430. I was impressed by the fact it offered the same features as cameras costing $25-100 more. I was also impressed by its simplicity and ease of use. And I was glad to buy innovative, high-quality, low-cost consumer technology from an American company.

However, this is the last Kodak product that I will ever purchase.

Why? Because I read with anger and dismay this morning that you had won a lawsuit against Sun over the supposed infringement by their Java language of patents you hold. I am a professional software engineer with 15 years of experience, and currently I do most of my work using Java. Over the last few years, I've also developed an interest in software patent law and intellectual property rights primarily because of the ongoing attempt by large corporations to take advantage of the badly broken legal and patent systems in order to extort royalties from other companies or entities who they claim have infringed their patents.

In other words, I know enough to realize that the basis of your patent claim is ridiculous. The patents you hold should be invalidated because they are based on prior art that dates back to a decade or more prior to the submission of your patent (i.e., Smalltalk, which was invented circa 1976, IBM OS/360, which was created in the mid-60's, and Lisp, which was invented around 1958). Any non-trivial software product is, by its very nature, the expression of a large body of ideas developed over the last 50 years (which, in turn, are based on the ideas of mathematics and logic that date back over 2000 years). None of these ideas should be patentable; in fact, doing so goes against the original intent and spirit of American patent law.

The attempt by Kodak and by other large corporations to "game" the system by taking advantage of the badly broken patent system and the inability of court system to deal effectively with intellectual property rights is not merely unethical, unprincipled, and unconscionable; it is a serious threat to the American economy. If Kodak and other corporations succeed in enforcing their unwarranted claims of patent infringement, it will destroy creativity and innovation in the American software industry because only large corporations with large legal departments will be able to attempt to develop software. Unfortunately, most of the innovation and creativity in the software industry comes from the proverbial "two guys in a garage" (e.g., Google), and two guys in a garage can't afford expensive lawyers, and they can't wait for the months or even years it takes to resolve even the most groundless patent infringement claim.

I realize that nothing will prevent you from going down this path, not even the boycotting of your products by informed consumers like me. The best we can hope for is that your claim will be overturned by a higher court, and that such a decision can be used as a basis for preventing or overturning other equally spurious suits.

Here's hoping you lose. And here's hoping that someday I read in the paper that your business practices have resulted in your collapse because you have been beaten in the marketplace by companies that pursued creativity and innovation instead of stagnation and litigation.