Microsoft loses Great Patent Race (again)

happygeek 0 432 Views

So just how many great ideas did you have last year? IBM managed to come up with 4895 during the course of 2009 that were good enough to be granted patents from the US Patent and Trademarks Office, cementing the Big Blue reputation as being King of the Patents. That eclipses the of 2008 when IBM were granted 4186 of the things.

Amazingly this means that IBM has topped the US patents chart for 17 years now, and is showing no sign of slowing down when it comes to innovation and invention. Samsung finished second in the race and Microsoft third, but the numbers of patents just cannot touch Big Blue. Samsung managed to file 3828 successful patents, while Microsoft were successful with 2903.

Of course, while there is a serious side to all this I cannot help but wonder how many truly idiotic patents were granted in 2009 that cover technology. If anyone has any examples of stupid patents in this field I'd love to hear them, as long as they can take on the worst of 2008 which included Microsoft patenting Page Up Page Down and Amazon patenting the awarding of a virtual badge.

My favourite for 2009 so far would probably have to be Nintendo which has patented a bouncy cushion games controller.

Dani AI

Generated

Good catch, — big players routinely dominate the "most patents" lists, but raw counts are a blunt instrument. A high grant tally shows filing capacity and legal spend more than commercial value. Plenty of granted patents are narrow, obvious, or never used; others are strategic and worth millions.

Quick checklist to tell the difference between a valuable patent and a likely "stupid" grant:

  • Forward citations: patents cited by later patents tend to be more influential.
  • Family coverage: protection in multiple jurisdictions usually signals investment and intent to commercialize.
  • Claim scope: broad independent claims give real exclusionary power; very specific claims often do not.
  • Maintenance and enforcement: paid maintenance fees, licenses, or litigation history indicate real value.
  • Commercial use: is the invention implemented in products or services, or cited in technical papers?
  • Prosecution history: large numbers of claim amendments or repeatedly narrowed claims can reduce enforceability.

Practical, low-cost workflow for startups evaluating patents or considering filing:

  1. Read the independent claims first — they define the legal boundary.
  2. Run a quick prior-art search (free databases exist) to test novelty.
  3. Check family size and forward citations to gauge importance.
  4. Decide patent vs trade secret: if the idea is easy to reverse-engineer, patent; if not, consider secrecy.
  5. Use a provisional application to buy time and lower initial cost.
  6. Before launch, get a focused freedom-to-operate opinion from counsel if risk is material, and budget for maintenance/enforcement.

is right to be wary — portfolios cost real money and are often defensive. For most developers and entrepreneurs, solid IP hygiene (documenting inventions, prioritizing filings that map to business value, and getting quick counsel when needed) is a far better use of resources than chasing headline counts.

Member Avatar for thizzle
thizzle 0 Newbie Poster

well, this isn't a suprise. The only thing that suprises me is that Microsoft isnt bankrupt with the stuff they pull

Be a part of the DaniWeb community

We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.

Edit Preview