CDR: Re: Internet bearer cryptography patent trusts (was Re: Chaumian cash redux)

[Dan Geer]

>   This idea below of a "patent pool" is similar to the bearer
>   cryptography patent trust idea...

Bob,

An actual discussion of the value of patents would be, at once,
fascinating, maddening, and pointless.

However, I will risk an anecdote.  I attended one of Guy Kawasaki's
"Boot Camp for Startups" and registered as "inventor."  Guy's events
are two days and almost entirely panel discussions, with some
motivational speakers thrown in.  Guy is superb, I should say, at
stocking the panels with people who know something.

Wearing my "inventor" badge, I asked nearly every member of nearly
every panel what they they had to say about intellectual property
protection.  This means that I asked the same question to samples
of size 4 of each of lawyers, accountants, entrepreneurs, noveau
riche cash-outs, venture capitalists, business strategy folk and
assorted greybeards.  Unanimously, the answer was "Intellectual
property protection is vital.  Do it right, do it early, don't
scrimp.  In a dog eat dog world, it is all you've really got."

With one exception.

Every single one of the VCs there, and similarly every single one
of the VCs I've talked to corroboratingly since, said that IP
protection is so pointless they don't even value it when sizing
a deal.  Why?  Because in the Internet sector, it is winner
take all.  Win it all, and your IP position does not matter.  Die
quick or slow, you're still dead and your IP position does not
matter.  Go for patents and you'll get something in 24-36 months
that is (1) almost surely overlapping somebody else's patent, 
the USPTO being what it is, and (2) totally irrelevant because
the live or die, the win it all or lose it all, point is circa
18 months.  The game is over before your pizza boy comes.

Unconvinced?  Cost out patenting something on a global basis...

--dan