Is The Lone Coder Dead? 809
CyNRG writes "The little guy. The one-person software company. Can it still exist today? That's me. I'm once again, after many years, writing my own commercial software to sell. A few things have changed: the patent feeding frenzy. This is my main concern. My perception is that one must verify that you don't infringe on any patents when developing new cool software, and that the explosion of patents granted by the USPTO has reached epic proportions. If this perception is true, then that makes it almost impossible for the Lone Coder to create something new that doesn't infringe on other patents. The amount of money required to perform the due diligence research seems like it would be greater than the amount of money needed to develop the software, or even the total revenues that the software could ever generate. Please someone tell me I'm wrong!" Is he?
Someone has to do it (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Someone has to do it (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Someone has to do it (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Someone has to do it (Score:5, Interesting)
Lone programmers still exist in specialised areas, the company I work for buys some geophysics software from a one man company.
Re:Someone has to do it (Score:5, Interesting)
American IP laws have been getting gradually worse for the better part of a decade.
But seriously,
With a couple of exceptions I can think of. Namely the e-commerce shopping cart patent, there hasn't been much of a threat to smaller development houses. I'm not saying it's not there, but I don't know if it's as bad as people think it is.
Small software houses pose problems for IP lawyers. First, they don't have any money. They barely make any money. They might make enough for the initial developer to get by, but when you're talking about the kind of money these companies are looking for, that's nothing. They'll spit at it.
Secondly,
Smaller firms are a lot more likely to find pro bono defense. There are a couple of non profit organizations like the EFF that are set up to do just that. Then there's the problem of groups of smaller companies banding together to cover legal costs. Any way you cut it, the smaller the firm you go after, the more likely you are to end up in court. Might sound good if you have genuine innovation at risk. But if you hold several hundred questionable patents on business processes, it's bad news.
If I were a patent hording firm, I would be going after the Sonys and IBMs of the world. That's a sure bet.
Re:Someone has to do it (Score:5, Funny)
Thank you for inquiring about our line of exciting products, including "Land of the Free", "Land of Opportunity", and our most popular product, "American Dream". As you can well imagine, our products are in very high demand and can often be difficult to obtain. For this reason, we have recently expanded our distribution channels and partnered with some very fine retailers. We hope that this information will be of use to you in your searching.
Since 2000, "Land of the Free" has been distributed by GOP Industries and is now marketed under their brand "Land of the Wealthy". A second, more modest version of this product is also available as "Land of the Drive-Thru-Please".
Long regarded as one of our most cherished offerings, "Land of Opporunity" is now available exclusively thru Wal-Mart. Enrollment in their "Greeter" program is required.
Without question, "American Dream" is our most popular product. Now available exclusively through the USPTO, this exciting product will make a fine family heirloom for generations to come. The MSRP is 3 congressmen and, due to the recent devaluation in Democratic Senators, we can only accept Republicans at this time. If you would like to own a piece of this exquisite product, please have your attorneys or lobbyist contact us directly.
You might also be interested in our latest prodct addition, a beautiful coffee-table book titled "A Guide to Ethics in American Politics". Weighing in at a hefty 2.5 ounces, this is a volume that anyone would be proud to display on their bookshelves.
We look forward to hearing from you soon,
Sincerely,
Karl Rove
US Customer Service Representative
Illuminati Corp.
The Details (Score:5, Funny)
A carefully worded post praising Suse Linux netted him a score of 4 he briefly basked in his own reflected glory. Unfortunately his very successs was also his downfall. Unable to handle the thought of another 1 point post after gaining acceptance for the first time through
On his computer were found many text files containing various drafts of "In Soviet Russia", "Imagine a Beaowulf", and other unposted commemts along with his predictions on their possible scores.
He leaves behind No Friends [slashdot.org], No Foes [slashdot.org], No Freaks [slashdot.org], and No Fans [slashdot.org], and no forwarding email.
Remember his final words: SuSE rules!! [slashdot.org]
Re:Someone has to...PRELIMINARY AUTOPSY RESULTS (Score:5, Funny)
In a later news release of the Preliminary Autopsy Results:
1. He had Type II diabetes from the consumption of Mountain Dew/Code Red.
2. He has extremity palsy from the intake of Jolt Cola.
3. He was having Grand Mal epileptic seizures from the MSG in his local Chinese takeout.
4. He had become reclusive with the shock of finding out that real, live women DIDN'T have staples in their navels.
5. He hands had become claws due to the carpal tunnel and tendonitis from his non-ergonomic keyboard.
HOWEVER, the proximate cause of death was...
6. He attempted to read the entire set of Don Knuth's TAOCP (The Art of Computer Programming) AND "Regular Expressions in PERL" in the same evening and HIS HEAD EXPLODED!!!
LATE BREAKING NEWS:
In a joint press announcment, Microsoft, Sun, Apple and SCO announced that they were SURE that the Lone Coder's work infringed on their IP, and they would be seeking redress beyond the grave, from the appropriate authorities, saying "If ANYONE thinks that merely by DYING they can escape the reach of our lawyers enforcing our intellectual property rights, they will find out just how far we will go to make sure that every line of ever written has the protection it deserves!"
He is survived by his parents, who will be paying off his student loans from MIT for the rest of their natural lives, and his high school sweetheart, who, unknown to the Lone Coder, due to lack of consortium, became a lesbian several years ago and moved to North Beach.
Richard Stallman has annouced that he's quite sure the Lone Coder's work was pretty much something that he had written in LISP on a napkin, one lunch 30 years ago at the Lampoon, but he was kinda buzzed and "...wasn't sure what i did with the *&)&*(&)( napkin...!"
Re:Someone has to...PRELIMINARY AUTOPSY RESULTS (Score:5, Funny)
Sheesh, kids these days :-)
Of course not (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Of course not (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Of course not (Score:4, Insightful)
The current trend is to take obvious ideas and add the phrase "on the internet" and boom, new invention.
Old Idea. "I want to buy something"
New Idea. "I want to buy something on the internet"
Old Idea. "I want to auction something"
New Idea. "I want to auction something on the internet"
Old Idea. "You can find things with a table of contents"
New Idea. "You can find things with a table of contents on my web site, which is on the internet"
Re:Of course not (Score:5, Insightful)
Except what will happen is something like:
Microsoft: "You have a patent we need."
Lone Coder: "OK. It'll cost you a million bucks."
Microsoft: "Forget it, we're going to use your stuff without paying."
Lone Coder: "Then I'll sue you."
Microsoft: "But our defense will be that our code is a tiny but significant bit different from yours. So we're not infringing."
Lone Coder: "I'll get a really good lawyer who'll show that you actually ARE infringing."
Microsoft: "That will take years. Lawyers are expensive. In the meantime, we believe that you are infringing on several of our patents. So we're going to unleash our army of lawyers onto you. Can you really afford the legal costs?"
Lone Coder: "You bastards."
Microsoft: "Now now. There's no need for ugly language. We're your buddies. We're here to help you! If you just sign over the rights to your patent to us, we will allow you to continue using it yourself. Of course, when our new blockbuster software comes out, your market is destroyed, but until that time you will be able to make a living."
Lone Coder: "Arghhhhhh!"
Microsoft: "And you pay us a million dollars, just so that we won't have our lawyers start sueing you for infringing our patents, as soon as we have thought up a couple that you probably are infringing."
Lone Coder: *whimper*
I hope not ... (Score:4, Insightful)
Count me as a fellow Lone Coder (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not easy -- you have to stoop to doing stuff like adding gratuitous links to your Slashdot posts.
This isn't going to be a popular sentiment here, but I'd say that the GPL and P2P generally make it tougher to make a living.
Re:Count me as a fellow Lone Coder (Score:3, Insightful)
I agree with you completely on the GPL. From the perspective of anyone who depends on writing software to make a living, it is an especially obnoxious proprietary license. It differs from typical proprietary licenses only in that the "proprietor" hires anybody who wants to work for it, pays them absolutely nothing, dumps all its products on the market for free, and will refuse to se
Re:Count me as a fellow Lone Coder (Score:5, Interesting)
Funny - I make my living by writing, integrating and providing valueadd support for BSD & GPL'd solutions (mostly web-based).
Most software is a commodity now so it's just the reality of the situation that providing services around opensource is more efficient than the ol' model of selling a piece of shrinked-wrapped artificial scarcity, or a license for same.
--
Re:Count me as a fellow Lone Coder (Score:3, Insightful)
The BSD license does not resemble a proprietary license. Neither does the Apache license, and people make plenty of money building on and supporting both Apache-licensed and BSD-licensed solutions, even though they are not as aggressive as the GPL.
The Apache and BSD licenses are truly free licenses. The GPL looks like a free license, and enjoys the reputation of a free license,
Re:Count me as a fellow Lone Coder (Score:3, Insightful)
Sorry, but I'm not in the camp that thinks the GPL is somehow bad because it lets you stand on the shoulders of giants while requiring you to do the same (if you distribute). You're not losing any "rights" by not being able to exploit the commons.
--
Re:Count me as a fellow Lone Coder (Score:3, Insightful)
Some don't want closed-source developers to be able to use their work. That's OK - but I don't think their work should be made a core part of operating systems.
I, personally, would probably choose either the LGPL or BSD license for any significant library I wrote, depending on the library and it's intended use. Smaller/simpler stuff I'd just
Re:Count me as a fellow Lone Coder (Score:5, Insightful)
When it comes to the GPL, I agree that is a restrictive license, and "less free" than the BSD/X11/MIT/Apache licenses. I can't say I agree with the rest, though.
GPLed works generally belong to no one person or organisation, true. This doesn't always have to be the case (take Asterisk or all FSF software, for example) but generally is. The difference is that I don't see how that's a problem, if all authors/contributors have decided that that license is appropriate for their work. In fact, surely it's much the same as a distributed group of people working on closed source software - the codebase doesn't belong to any one of them - except that the GPL developers let you use their work under a different set of conditions?
You do not lose the rights to your work if you incorporate GPL code. You will generally have the option, much the same as for any other copyright infringement, of removing and rewriting that portion of the code. You may have to pay damages or settle for other remedies, especially if the copying was knowing. The difference between the GPL and a proprietary license is that it offers you the
The point is that in many ways the GPL is just another proprietary license, it just gives you different options and a different set of restrictions. Many find it much easier to agree with than other licenses, many others find it impossible to accept. So what? Your own view undermines your complaints - if the authors of GPL works had wanted their work free for everybody to use however they wanted, the would've released under the BSD license or similar. Complaining that they didn't has as much validity as if I complain that your work isn't released under the BSD license, because I want to use it in my work without offering you any compensation.
Re:Count me as a fellow Lone Coder (Score:5, Insightful)
The GPL can never cause you to lose any rights to your own work; only to derivative works of other works that you would not have any right to incorporate without the GPL. Now, if you incorporate GPL'ed code into something you've written, you still only own the part you wrote, not the whole shebang. And if you release your work under the GPL, and someone contributes improvements to it, you only own the part you wrote; you have rights to the contributions only under the GPL.
Complaints about the GPL "taking away my rights" basically amount to the vocalizations of people who want to use other people's work without abiding by the terms (based on giving back to the community) that the author of that work set. Basically, GPL-hatred is a kind of looter-mentality.
Re:Count me as a fellow Lone Coder (Score:3, Insightful)
Anyway, GPL proliferation made living off coding more difficult. There was a small paper written by Stallman himself where he discussed this, and pretty much ended up agreeing that yes, as software becomes a comodity, programmers will get paid less - this compensated by other benefits from open source licensing. I just can't find
Of course your view is not popular. (Score:3, Insightful)
Most programmers do not realize that their role has changed in many instances from IT Designer or Engineer to IT Quick FIx or Janitorial Service.
If you do not understand the nature of software today do not expect to receive sympathy for a vision of the wolrd that is contradicted by day to day reality and facts.
The only thing copyright infringers can't copy is your personaly lended support. The more software you write and release under open licensing
Re:Count me as a fellow Lone Coder (Score:3, Insightful)
This reply to my post (just above it) perfectly demonstrates what it can be like.
So here I am, trying to pay my own way -- and the response isn't "no thanks, it's not for me" -- it's this weird and totally unnecessary hostility.
I'm used to it, and I know that people like this don't generally contribute much (GPL or otherwise), but for a n
Re:Count me as a fellow Lone Coder (Score:5, Interesting)
There are reasons for this, but you could think them up as easily as me. More relevant are the implications. In this case, since the grandparent was able to swap to a GPLed version tells me you've got something close to a commodity. And this means you're going to have to keep innovating, staying ahead of the GPLed version, or else users will gradully shift to the cheaper, more flexible alternative.
If you want to continue selling shrinkwrapped software as a one-man team, then I suggest you look at where the free software movement has traditionally done badly -- areas where the software cannot be totally free (due to integration with non-free data), very expensive products for a small market, etc.
But I think a more viable long-term option is to start adding software modifications/consulting and the like to your portfolio.
Of course, there is no hurry for any of this, I just expect every year will be a little harder than the one before.
Re:Count me as a fellow Lone Coder (Score:5, Insightful)
not hostile at all - more sardonic than anything else.
simply pointing out that you opened yourself up to losing a potential customer to a gpl product precisely because you did not offer what open source does - the ability to modify the software for one's own needs.
maybe doing that keeps you some customers, but obviously it loses you others.
Re:Count me as a fellow Lone Coder (Score:3, Funny)
racist: check.
ad hominem: check.
homophobe: check.
anonymous: check.
coward: check.
diagnosis: troll.
Re:Count me as a fellow Lone Coder (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm not pissed about the attitude, I just think it's counterproductive.
It's certainly true that the core Andromeda code isn't directly modifiable -- thought it is modifiable via separate prefs & skin files. There are a number of reasons for that, but I don't want to clutter up the thread going into Andromeda details.
However, you should take care to note that this poster seems to be implying that, had Andromeda been GPL, that then he would have paid. Do you really believe that?
No, he isn't going to pay if the code is not GPL, and he isn't going to pay if it is. He just wants stuff for nothing.
SO, in the context of a thread about trying to make a living as a self-employed coder, he is irrelevant (apart from observing his somewhat typical hostile attitude).
Re:Count me as a fellow Lone Coder (Score:4, Insightful)
You may indeed be one of those people, and I know from personal experience that those people are really great. However, I can also tell you from personal experience that there just aren't enough like you.
You simply can't make it as a full-time coder on a begware basis -- ask any coder with a "donate" button, you'll see. Sure there are exceptions -- but mostly from corporate sponsorship for mega projects like Apache, Firefox, etc.
I am not a lawyer (Score:5, Interesting)
Patent enforcement is the job of the patent holder. You do not need to do "due diligence" unless you are basing your design on someone else's patented product. Or you are attempting to publish your own patent.
Re:I am not a lawyer (Score:3, Informative)
Remember, ignorence is no excuse in court.
Re:I am not a lawyer (Score:5, Informative)
Damned if you do. Damned if you don't.
Re:I am not a lawyer (Score:5, Interesting)
Look, all the patent does is allow someone to sue you if they believe they can prove in court your work infringes the patent. This requires several steps to have a real effect on you.
1) They have to notice you
2) They have to care somewhat about what you are doing and analyze it in some detail to determine it is in their patent library
3a) You have to be perceived as a threat to be shut down
3b) alternatively, you could have deep pockets to be emptied.
4) They have to contact you/make the first move
5) They have to decide to sue you
6) They have to be successful enough in court to
7a) bankrupt you
7b) make you empty your deep pockets
7c) make you stop and do something else.
At many points along the way, the process can break down in your favor.
- A lone coder can easily stay under the radar while making a comfortable living for one person.
- Unless they hear about your product, and are able to gather enough information, they won't know it infringes their patents.
- If you are successful enough to have deep enough pockets that a patent-holder notices (and patent holders have to be big enough to spend many thousands of dollars to file a defensible patent, not to mention R&D for real innovation), or to be perceived as a threat, you've made enough money to hire a good lawyer. Or, enough money to give up without a fight and retire on your savings.
- When they contact you, you can counteroffer. Lawsuits are risky. Maybe you can create a win-win situation which they would prefer to a possible lose-win situation favoring you. You probably have some code they would like, or skills they would find useful. Offer to come work for them, or license the code to them, or some other kind of collaboration.
- If they decide to crush you instead of accepting the offer, you can just walk away. Agree to cease & desist, and move on. If you don't have enough money to walk away, they what the hell are they suing you for?
Patent holders are either
1) huge companies that don't care about the little ants scurrying around beneath them unless the ant looks like its going to grow into something big. Then, they would rather buy it than crush it.
Mostly, they get patents to cross-license as protection or to protect their market niche from the other huge companies or *aggressive* startups.
2) small companies looking for a big company to sue for violating a patent. They are an ant themselves, looking to take down one of the elephants. Other ants don't have enough money to make enticing targets.
Neither of these cases really cares about crushing some lone coder just for the savage thrill.
Plus, (IANAL) the damages they can get are related to the profits they would have had but for the infringement. If you are some small potatoes guy, the revenue you suck away would be tiny, unless you are obviously going against some cash cow like Microsoft Office or iTunes Music Store or a commercial data base. Creating a commercial product dedicated directly to putting MS out of business is obviously asking for trouble. But is also beyond the lone coder.
Don't waste psychic energy worrying about the remote risk that a patent lawsuit will crush you. You'll have plenty of other reasons to fail, anyway. Life is too short to worry about this kind of thing before the C&D warning shot comes over the bow.
Re:I am not a lawyer (Score:5, Interesting)
Honda has a patent regarding the routing of the front brake line on their motocross bikes. Yamaha is forced to use an alternate (longer) routing to keep from infringing the patent, which ends up decreasing sensitivity on the front brake.
Suzuki ignores the patent. Honda doesn't care. They aren't nearly as concerned about losing sales to Suz as they are to Yamaha.
And I have a bunch of short brake line kits for those yams, if anyone wants better brake feel.
Re:I am not a lawyer (Score:4, Interesting)
- make the world a better place.
- get rich.
- continue having fun with computers.
I hope the world (the US court system and the idiots with a bankroll for lawyers) let me.
Taking your points:
1. They notice me.
My first products are built on software from IBM. I hope the partnership with IBM develops so they:
- Won't sue me. (I am helping to sell their products too.)
- May assist in my defense against lawsuits. This is a long shot, but I can dream, right?
2. Realize I am violating a patent.
Given the state of patents, I assume every new program violates many of them, including anything I write. So I assume I will get sued. Today, there is no chance that a "Lone Coder" could market anything without getting sued.
3a. Need to be a threat.
One of my programs obsoletes most of what MS has said Longhorn will do. That should count as a threat.
3b. Deep pockets.
We are in negotiations to license one of my programs for several million dollars. Does that count as "deep pockets"?
4 & 5. They make a move and sue me.
Are you kidding? There are too many "companies" producing nothing but lawsuits for me to even hope I have a chance to not be sued.
6. The courts.
Of course the courts will allow them to sue me. What else are the courts for?
7a & b. Bankruptcy, Broke
I hope to have enough money to survive the smaller players. I hope to make partners to survive the big players (MS). Declaring bankruptcy is the last line of the business plan. We expect it.
7c. Do something else.
Always have a Plan B. Mine involves an estate somewhere warm with swimming pools. That will not advance the state of computers, but at least I have a plan.
== Points in my favor? ==
- Stay under the radar?
I want to improve the world. I don't worry about developing ideas unless they have the potential to produce millions of dolllars. That is not a good plan for staying under the radar.
- Lawyers?
I have a good IP law firm. While I expect them to defend me, and keep the cases in court as long as possible without any impediments to my business, they are expensive, and eventually the cost of the lawyers will eat all the profits. At that point, I'll quit.
- Counter-offers
They are only good when the other "company" has something to lose. If they are suing for the hope of a big win, it will be difficult to buy them off. Cross-licensing is useless when the other company only produces lawsuits, since lawyers will not pass laws allowing patents restricting lawsuits, and none of my patents would be relevant.
- Big companies
If MS sues me, I am releasing the software as open source. That is the step in the business plan just before going bankrupt.
- Small companies
I like your comparison to ants, but a few million dollars will seem like much money to an ant. Why should they take on an elephant when they can retire by stepping on another ant?
Don't assume a "Lone Coder" cannot be a threat to the big guys. Linus managed to create the only violable threat to MSWindows. One of my programs threatens most of the business software sold today. Yes, Linux involved many other people before it became a real threat, and I expect to hire other people before my programs are brought to market. But the ideas were first developed by a Lone Coder.
I agree with your last point. Our first goal is to make money. Then we need to polish our other programs and bring them to market. Then we'll wait until lawsuits bankrupt us. Hopefully I will still have Plan B.
Re:I am not a lawyer (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:I am not a lawyer (Score:3, Interesting)
Not to mention that no one takes Sealand seriously and would bother respecting claims of sovereignty anyway.
Do they offer Corporation Registration Service ? (Score:4, Informative)
Physically, I doubt that Sealand can hold many a lone-coder, for they are just the size of a football field, in the middle of nowhere.
Virtually, maybe I can get my domain / website to be hosted there, and no one has the legal right to confiscate my server. But this still doesn't offer enough protection.
So we go to the third option - Legal
Unless Sealand is a internationally recognized sovereign country, anything registered there, whether be corporate entity or not, will NOT be recognized anywhere else.
The money made by corporation registered on Sealand - if they offer that - will be deemed "black money" in the rest of the world, and legal agencies from the Tax Department to FBI will harrass you whenever you transfer money out of your Sealand account into your local account.
So
Re:I am not a lawyer (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I am not a lawyer (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, as per previous talks about patents, a lot of today's patents are based upon previous patents with slight changes here and there. Therefore, always base your product upon expired patented items. Really though, patent infringement on many of today's things should be easily avoided. After all, more than six million patents have been given out since the founding of the US. How many of those do you think are still valid? (Even at Microsoft's threatened 3000 patents this year - that is sti
Re:I am not a lawyer (Score:3, Insightful)
Repeat ad infinitum.
Re:I am not a lawyer (Score:3, Informative)
That's kinda the point. With all the ridiculous software patents, it's a minefield in which you could unwittingly step on an existing patent unless you do some research beforehand.
Re:I am not a lawyer (Score:5, Interesting)
That makes sense, doesn't it? Looking up and citing other work in the field is certainly the way that academic publishing works. Unfortunately the unintended consequences of patent law make it such that it doesn't work out that way.
When I was (forced by my boss to be) applying for a software patent, my boss told me to look around for other things that might be similar to what we'd done. And as soon as the patent lawyers heard that he told me that, they went through the roof, and immediately told me to stop. Here's why:
Patent law says that you're legally required to reference any potentially overlapping work that you know about in your application. If someone can show that there was something that you knew about and didn't cite in your application, it's grounds for revoking the patent. It's very hard to write laws that talk about what someone ought to know or be aware of, though, so you only have to include things that you are actually aware of. But the more citations you include in your application, the greater the chance that the examiner will reject the application because of one of those related patents you cited. (You can see where this is going...) So, from a legal standpoint, the best situation is one where you honestly have no knowledge of any other work in the field, so you can submit an application with no citations. So you never do any kind of "due diligence" searching when you submit a patent, because all it can do is decrease the chances that it will get granted.
So you really probably shouldn't ever read patents (see my other post in this article about why it's a bad idea for programmers to look for infringing patents). Which is kind of strange and sad considering that one of the main points of the patent office was supposed to be to provide a legally protected way to publicize information about technology to encourage further growth and development.
IANAL, either. Just a disappointed observer, discouraged at how terribly out of control our patent office and patent law has become.
You're wrong. (Score:4, Insightful)
Seriously though, the one good thing I can think of about all this ridiculous IP litigation is that it actually can drive a good 'lone coder' to really innovate as opposed to create the same old mouse trap in a different way.
In either case, good luck to you. Make us proud.
Yes! (No) (Score:5, Insightful)
From what I've seen of the software market today, one-man teams still seem to be a way to make money. You just have to find the right market, and avoid overextending yourself - do a good job on the things you can manage, instead of trying to do everything and doing a crappy job of it. I've seen lots of developers succeed by marketing shareware or selling software over the internet (especially as far as indie games go, for example Starscape).
Re:Yes! (No) (Score:3, Insightful)
If you're being sued, hopefully this means you've actually created a product that was successful enough to get noticed. That's the hard part. Defending yourself from a patent suit, while expensive and shitty, isn't nearly as hard as creating a product that matters in the first place.
-da
Re:Who's going to sue you (Score:4, Funny)
Why that would be like billion dollars music corporations suing 12 year olds for listening to bootleg music...
What an irrational, ridiculous, and fuitless waste of time and legal process that would be, eh?
-- Genda
Re:Who's going to sue you (Score:3, Informative)
And they didn't sue a 12 year old child, either. The ISP account wasn't in the kid's name, it was in the parent's name. If the parent isn't monitoring the kids, they deserve what they get.
Bittorrent (Score:4, Interesting)
If that kind of success is not enough, I don't know what is.
Re:Bittorrent (Score:5, Insightful)
==Skills==
*Bittorent: Imagined, designed, coded, deployed, and now maintaining the Bittorent protocol and OS-independent Python client. 12 million users since 2003; 500,000 gigabytes of transfers per day on average.
==Objective==
Build a world-class, industrial-grade extranet messaging and collaboration protocol for your company.
==Requirement==
$180,000/yr, total combined annual work hours not to exceed 2300. Cost of living adjustment based on consumer index no later than April 1 of each year. Choice of location.
I tell you, if this guy works for a company 4 years and costs them $1M, they will have gotten themselves a bargain. This guy is cheaper than an average team of 4.
Re:Bittorrent (Score:3, Interesting)
Uh, no. Blizzard [i]does[/i] use BitTorrent for releasing patches for the World of Warcraft beta among other things, but he most definitely does not work for them.
He works for Valve Software...he's probably involved with Steam these days.
Re:Bittorrent (Score:5, Informative)
Blizzard is the one using bittorrent to distribute its patches, and their implementation of it is exceedingly poor.
The Lone Coder is Dead. Long live the Consultant (Score:5, Insightful)
What's a coder to do?
Code away on an open source project, gove away all your hard work.
THEN...
Offer your services as an implemetation and customization consultant for said open source software for businesses.
Implementations are not fun, but pound for pound, you get serous cash. Especially if you wrote the software to begin with. You can charge the most.
Re:The Lone Coder is Dead. Long live the Consultan (Score:5, Insightful)
Consulting sucks (Score:3, Interesting)
If you like doing those things, consulting is fine, but it's a really different lifestyle and business than selling a product.
Re:The Lone Coder is Dead. Long live the Consultan (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The Lone Coder is Dead. Long live the Consultan (Score:3, Interesting)
I hear they're having financial trouble these days. Wouldn't it be ironic if that worked.
Not if you're Jeff Minter (Score:5, Informative)
So... no. That said, I know lots of other people that have two-three person teams that make a nice bit of cash here and there from coding.
As long as your code is good, it doesn't crash, and my grandma can use it without resorting to profanity, you'll make a nice piece of money.
Not alot, but maybe enough if you hire a good enough marketer.
Economist article (Score:5, Informative)
http://economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?sto
Not to worry... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Not to worry... (Score:5, Informative)
Hmmmmn,
1) Some algorithms are easy to spot - you don't need the code.
2) Some patents cover business methods & possibly looknfeel.
3) The DMCA does not make all reverse engineering illegal.
I think patents are definitely a problem for all small software shops - closed or open.
Re:Not to worry... (Score:3, Insightful)
My point being that he may be building some software that infringes on someone's patent, but he doesn't realize it. If one didn't realize that Amazon patented 1-click shopping and included it in some software package, he would still be liable for damages, even though he didn't know about the patent.
What he's asking can't be solved by security-through-obsc
Re:Not to worry... (Score:5, Informative)
Second, according to the DMCA reverse engineering is NOT illegal. Breaking copy encryption is.
Don't search for possible infringement (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh yes and sell out to the big boys, get that indemnification and let them worry about the suit.
Spiderweb software, and others... (Score:5, Informative)
See http://www.spiderwebsoftware.com/ [spiderwebsoftware.com].
Thomas Warfield, author of Pretty Good Solitaire, Pretty Good Majongg, etc., is also a Lone Coder.
See http://www.asharewarelife.com/ [asharewarelife.com].
See generally discussion on "micro-isvs" at http://www.microisv.com/ [microisv.com].
economist: Return of the homebrew coder (Score:3, Informative)
Yes (Score:5, Insightful)
It's the same as any other mature industry. A single person can't really build a car from scratch either. At least not one that has any hope of competing with the product of a large design team.
I mean I don't like software patents anymore than most people on Slashdot, but your argument doesn't appeal to me.
-Spyky
Re:Yes (Score:4, Interesting)
Dada Mail and Myself (Score:3, Interesting)
It's basically fed me for the past three years now; I work on it primarily alone - it's also open source, I make money on a "Pro" distribution, selling an advanced downloadable manual, installation and consultation services.
Very incredibly low overhead for me to run the "shop", and it's still somewhat fun to do.
Oh and I graduated in art - no CS (or math, sans an accounting class) background.
Why should we comfort you... (Score:3, Funny)
No, the Lone Coder is not dead (Score:3, Informative)
The situation's simultanously better and worse... (Score:5, Insightful)
2. Even if you ARE clear of existing patents, what if a big company decides to fight you in court? Again, a small or medium-sized company could never afford to fight this.
3. Then again, it's not always in some big company's interest to shut you down or sue you out of existance. Often they probably just want a chunk of your profits. (and a chunk of zero is still zero, so they don't make money if you fold, either)
What a fucking country.
Not Dead, But I Smell that Way (Score:3, Insightful)
1. Marketing costs are high and price per unit that users are willing to pay are not high. Unless you've got way into six figures to for advertising and marketing, forget about getting your sales out of two figures.
2. This means that you've got to sell high-priced apps. And the best shot at these would be business-specific custom or semi-custom apps for medium-sized companies (big companies have IT shops to write their own custom apps). I used to do pretty well at that sort of thing. Unfoturnately, medium-sized businesses usually by now have some fool who can do just about as good with Excel or Access as you can do with whatever you lone code with. So why wouldn't they let their in-house code monkey enjoy a little job enrichment by writing the app instead of paying you thousands of dollars to write it?
3. Computers are everywhere now, and everyone knows of their risks. Few companies will trust a lone coder with anything important because of all the computer risks associated with 1-man project.
There are still a few that do it, but most of the ones who I've known to be successful in the past are moved on now.
Setup a freaking corporation! (Score:4, Interesting)
No, really. If you incorporate (for $800 or so), then the worst that can happen is that your little company is made non-existent.
At least I don't think they'll pierce the corporate veil over a small company. It's simply not worth their time.
The Lone Coder will never die. (Score:3, Insightful)
Don't worry about it (Score:5, Insightful)
B. As a small operation, you're not the target of infringement lawsuits.
C. If you're doing closed-source software, they probably won't be able to tell you're infringing unless it's some patented video or audio codec implementation.
Keep in mind that you don't go straight from infringement to a lawsuit. The patent holder may well just want you to take a license, which can be negotiated as a royalty paid to them on copies of the software you sell.
If you can't afford a license, or they won't sell you one, you will have to rework your code not to use the patented idea.
The sky isn't falling. There are all manner of different liabilities that can pop up for any business at any time. There is no way to predict it. That's what insurance and indemnification are for.
Write Games (Score:3, Interesting)
This has led me to thinking of developing games. I've never once seen a video game patent case. Are games immune from patents? They are software, and really it seems like pretty much the same thing to me. For example, Tetris was really unique for its time, but now there are hundreds of clones. What really is different between an inventive form of gameplay vs. some of the foolish software patents that are out there now? Really, I want to know why this is so different! Please any comments welcome.
Nick Bolton made millions from Mailwasher (Score:3, Insightful)
ignore the IP - just do it (Score:4, Interesting)
what's the phrase, 'its better to ask forgiveness for an act than to ask permission, beforehand'.
IANAL, but this is almost exactly what the big corp lawyers told us, when we gathered at a group meeting and were asking about how to go about developing code that doesn't infringe.
no, temper this with the fact that they have a team of lawyers which is bigger than your whole company. so I'm not sure their advice still sticks. ymmv..
Patent litigation shouldn't keep you up nights (Score:3, Interesting)
A more likely scenario is you build something that's moderately successful and shiit-for-brains-we-don't-produce-anything-but-lit igation company comes after you, and probably a bunch of bigger fish, for royalties. More likely they'll go after the big fish first, then you smaller players later.
The way to beat these kinds of cases is 30 or 40 of you team up to mount a collective defense. FIghting one little company is easy, fighting the Borg is whole different deal. If it's an abusive patent with prior art worth fighting you stand a good chance.
Check Out X-Plane (Score:3, Interesting)
Neyer Software (Score:3, Insightful)
My dad is a one man coder. He sells software used for statistical analysis, at quite a pretty penny, too. As far as he's explained it to me, he's been selling more or less the same software for 15+ years now, but he keeps making new versions because changes in windows will occaionsally make his software stop working, so the people who need it just go buy a new copy.
I don't know how much he makes annually selling the software, but I assume it's probably not enough to support a family with.
Well... You might as well forget about SELLING it. (Score:4, Interesting)
A) Large companies, who hate small developers with an awe-inspiring passion, have patented everything under the sun, so even if your project is successful, you're going to get the shaft sooner or later;
B) If your project IS successful, someone's going to come along and yank it right out from under you. Maybe you'll be sued for patent infringement and sign your stuff over in the settlement, or maybe Microsoft will integrate a competing product with Windows, making you irrelevant, or maybe a college kid just as smart as you will come out with competing freeware -- you'll get hosed one way or the other;
C) Anyone who IS interested in your product is going to download it off a pirate site anyway. Think I'm kidding? I can't tell you how many times I've heard some doofus consultant laugh "But I never pay for software! Windows is free, man." I tell them that I religiously pay for everything, that it's a matter of professional courtesy -- and they almost cough up their livers laughing at me. THIS IS THE MARKET YOU'RE IN. You can't make money in it.
Given these basic facts, what should a programmer do? Here's MY position; I see two possibilities, which you can blend a bit if you like:
Possibility Number 1: You write open-source software, you GPL all your stuff, and you sign over the copyrights to the FSF, who have many, many lawyers. You might not make any money doing this, but you get to use your software without restrictions, forever. Also (tasty) you get to seriously annoy the suits who'd like to make money off your stuff. It's no longer possible for someone to take it from you.
Possibility Number 2: the hacker model: you keep all your cool stuff to yourself, and you trade it with your close friends for their cool stuff. You guys are now the only people with this cool stuff. It's like the force; you are different and have secret abilities that the herd isn't aware of. It's fun and interesting. You meet other groups of people with their own cool stuff and trade; thus you become the Ham Radio operators of the programming world.
The lone developer isn't going anywhere. He's just going back to the garage and hacker groups he came from.
Perhaps -- just perhaps -- this is a Good Thing.
I'm still here! (Score:4, Interesting)
I have a software company with two other guys. Each one of us is in a different project. I'm handling a project all by myself, writing custom software for a client, and I get to do some small projects from time to time too.
We use open source where we can and contribute back where we can. I'm starting an open source project, writing (yet another) CMS, this one with technologies I'm familiar and feel comfortable with. We plan to use this on some projects with a small web design company, so they can sell a dynamic web site and later we can get to support it (directly or through them, it's all good).
I like to think that the future of software development will be something like mechanics are now (at least here in Mexico). You can take your new or fancy car to the dealer for small repairs and maintenance, but almost everybody takes their car to some small shop run by a couple of guys who know their stuff. They get their clients mostly by word-of-mouth recommendations. Some mechanics try to rip you off, you don't go back, but if you like their work, you'll recommending them to people you know.
So I think there will always be big software companies, making big projects and writing huge complex applications, like SAP and such. Big corporations can make business with this big developers. But many companies will go to the smaller development companies that use open source and run a small shop, to cut costs without sacrificing quality and having more direct contact with the people who are going to write their software.
So maybe the lone coders will not make big big bucks like before, but we can still make a living and enjoy our work.
EUROPE!!! (Score:5, Interesting)
The new IP-laws will lake just a little longer to pass, now that 10 new countries joined the EU. They need to negotiate and vote over it again.
The Inspiring Tale of Audion (Score:3, Interesting)
Thrill to their tale of almost being bought out by AOL in 1999 [panic.com]. Weep at their account of being told offf by Steve jobs at Macworld [panic.com], as he developed a new program (itunes) that would eventually devour our heroes.
And yet, in the end, the developers' attitude and story inspired the heck out of me. Yes, one guy, working alone, with the right idea, at the right time, can make it big.
Don't blame big government for your fears. Just come up with something brilliant and take the plunge. And see what happens.
Lone coder (Score:4, Interesting)
Actually, doing patent searches is bad.... (Score:3, Interesting)
So my 'not a lawyer' advise is don't look for patents until someone comes knocking on your door.
--buddy
You are not alone (Score:3, Interesting)
The bad news is
It's even worse. (Score:4, Interesting)
First Byte inc. Filed a Patent on playing PWM Audio on the PC internal Speaker, I assume after disassembling my binary (written in Assembly) that I had posted on Compuserve(the copy a bug I had in that code into there patent). They then started suing everyone who had also dissembled my code and started using it in there products. Finally I become an expert witness for Activision and had to sign an affidavit stating that I had prior art to help get the First Byte patent overturned! And a few companes liscenced the code official from me. http://www.dnull.com/zebraresearch/ (code is posted)
The same is true for much of the code I have done. Some of the first audio and video(in and out), on Apple II, CoCo , PC , C64, Lisa, Mac.
Multimedia over BBS's , Multi-tone audio out of 1bit output (1983)(AKA, polyphonic ringtones),
LCD oscilloscope (1986),
Streaming audio over IP now called VOIP , portable compressed music player (1987),
TCP/IP over Spread Spectrum RF and Laser(1988),
Streaming Video over IP Lan in (1989),
Streaming video across Sun Microsystem global IP WAN, TCP/IP over Laser (1991),
Internet Banking web site(for Wells Fargo 1992)
Livecam (1994),
Content Distribution Networks , fault tolerant web server, Single threaded web server and web server with compressed log files output(1995)
Error Correction over IP, CCTV DVR, Streaming audio over JAVA(1996),
Parallel processor Video Compression and HDTV streaming over the Internet (1999).
Silent computers and water cooled blades(2000),
There was even a company that threated to sue me after stealing my code outright! They just changed the authorship names. Fortunatly I had left hidden in the code in the server if you gave it the right URL from a browser it reported my name as the author. I never managed to stop them from selling there version of the product though.
Can't talk about the newer stuff since I have started to file patents So I don't get prevented from using my own stuff.
My biggest problem is how do I protect myself.
Seems like whenever I try to publish something, someone else borrows it, (or at least the concept) and puts it out farther and faster then I can and takes the credit for it. I know I just plan suck a PR and getting the word out , but still.
I at least want to be able to prove original authorship and invention for the ideas and concepts. And it seems anything less then filing patents one each one has been ineffective.
Re:ok - you are wrong! (Score:5, Funny)
"You know I can't promise that."
"If you did, I'd make love to you right now."
"I promise. I will never die."
Re:ok - you are wrong! (Score:3, Informative)
Re:ok - you are wrong! (Score:5, Interesting)
step one Incorporate.
step two pay yourself a salary
step three you are safe.
Incorporating is to protect you from bullshit, it costs less then 100 dollors.
MS set the president that companies are not guilty for the infringemeant of their users.
There are additional taxes though, the corporations income and your income.
Re:ok - you are wrong! (Score:4, Funny)
Ahah! So this explains how Dubya got back in.
Re:ok - you are wrong! (Score:4, Informative)
Re:ok - you are wrong! (Score:3, Insightful)
The fees vary immensely in the US depending on what State you incorporate in, among other things. Delaware has very corporation-friendly laws in many ways, and is famous for being the state where you can incorporate for $100.
At any rate, the original post in this thre
Re:Living Proof Speaks Out (Score:3, Interesting)
that pretty much describes me - in fact i'm going to give this model a try myself.
i have to say though - get back to us after your company has survived a year or two after you've burned through your seed capital.
Re:Cooking Patents (Score:4, Interesting)
The same is true of games. You can copyright a certain presentation of, say, Monopoly. But you can't copyright the rules that describe how to play the game Monopoly. (Trademark, of course, may forbid you from using the name 'Monopoly' if you choose to sell your version of the rules. But neither trademark nor copyright can stop you from selling your version of the Monopoly rules under a different name.)
You can read this at the copyright office web site.
So, no, I never did understand how computer code could be copyrighted.
In general, things cannot be copyrighted unless copyright-ability has been specifically extended to that kind of thing. The natural state of things is assumed not to be able to be copyrighted. So, you can't copyright a cheesecake, or a chair, or a scarf, unless Congress specifically says that you can.
I rant further about this at http://www.hoboes.com/Mimsy/?ART=9 [hoboes.com].
Jerry
Re:Move to a civilized country (Score:3, Insightful)
Err, no, with Bush in power, it's probably headed in the other direction, toward direct confrontation.
Hear about the ongoing steel tariffs war?
Microsoft fined for monopolist behaviour?
GM Crops?