Glean 拾遗
专辑 / Paul Graham 文集 / Paul Graham 提出“专利承诺”:不对少于25人的公司首先使用软件专利

Paul Graham 提出“专利承诺”:不对少于25人的公司首先使用软件专利

原文 www.paulgraham.com 收录 2026-07-07 15:44 阅读 4 min
AI 解读

2011 年,Paul Graham 提出一项不具有法律约束力的行业自律倡议:科技公司公开承诺不对员工少于25人的初创公司首先使用软件专利。他认为这是一种下游策略,可以在不等待政府改革的情况下减少大公司利用专利压制小公司创新的行为。承诺让秉持这一原则的公司吸引到更优秀的人才,同时让那些通过诉讼而非产品竞争的公司暴露在公众视野中,从而面临员工和投资者的抵制。文章还指出,该承诺无法解决专利流氓问题,但能直击大公司扼杀创新的要害,并鼓励个人向雇主询问立场。

原文 4 分钟
原文 www.paulgraham.com ↗
§ 1

The Patent Pledge

专利承诺

§ 2

August 2011I realized recently that we may be able to solve part of the patent problem without waiting for the government.

2011年8月。我最近意识到,也许我们无需等待政府,就能解决部分专利问题。

§ 3

I've never been 100% sure whether patents help or hinder technological progress. When I was a kid I thought they helped. I thought they protected inventors from having their ideas stolen by big companies. Maybe that was truer in the past, when more things were physical. But regardless of whether patents are in general a good thing, there do seem to be bad ways of using them. And since bad uses of patents seem to be increasing, there is an increasing call for patent reform.

The problem with patent reform is that it has to go through the government. That tends to be slow. But recently I realized we can also attack the problem downstream. As well as pinching off the stream of patents at the point where they're issued, we may in some cases be able to pinch it off at the point where they're used.

我从来没有百分百确定专利是促进还是阻碍技术进步。小时候我认为它们有帮助,以为专利能保护发明者的创意不被大公司窃取。也许在过去,当更多东西是实体时,这种看法更准确。但不管专利整体上是好是坏,确实存在一些对专利的不良使用方式。而且由于不良使用似乎在增加,要求专利改革的呼声也越来越高。

专利改革的问题在于必须通过政府,而这往往很缓慢。但最近我意识到,我们也可以从下游入手解决问题。除了在专利颁发时截断专利流,在某些情况下,我们或许还能在使用环节截断它。

§ 4

One way of using patents that clearly does not encourage innovation is when established companies with bad products use patents to suppress small competitors with good products. This is the type of abuse we may be able to decrease without having to go through the government.

The way to do it is to get the companies that are above pulling this sort of trick to pledge publicly not to. Then the ones that won't make such a pledge will be very conspicuous. Potential employees won't want to work for them. And investors, too, will be able to see that they're the sort of company that competes by litigation rather than by making good products.

有一种对专利的使用方式明显不鼓励创新:当成熟公司产品不佳时,利用专利来压制拥有好产品的小型竞争者。这类滥用行为,我们或许无需通过政府就能减少。

具体做法是,让那些不屑于耍这种花招的公司公开承诺不会这么做。这样一来,那些不愿做出承诺的公司就会非常显眼。潜在员工不会想为他们工作,投资者也会看出他们是靠诉讼而非好产品竞争的公司。

§ 5

Here's the pledge:

No first use of software patents against companies with less than 25 people.

以下是承诺内容:

不对少于25人的公司率先使用软件专利。

§ 6

I've deliberately traded precision for brevity. The patent pledge is not legally binding. It's like Google's "Don't be evil." They don't define what evil is, but by publicly saying that, they're saying they're willing to be held to a standard that, say, Altria is not. And though constraining, "Don't be evil" has been good for Google. Technology companies win by attracting the most productive people, and the most productive people are attracted to employers who hold themselves to a higher standard than the law requires. [1]

我故意用精确性换取了简洁。专利承诺不具备法律约束力,它就像谷歌的“不作恶”。他们没有定义什么是恶,但公开说出这句话,意味着他们愿意接受一个比奥驰亚等公司更高的标准。尽管有约束,“不作恶”对谷歌来说一直是有好处的。科技公司靠吸引最具生产力的人才取胜,而最具生产力的人会被那些自我要求高于法律标准的雇主所吸引。[1]

§ 7

The patent pledge is in effect a narrower but open source "Don't be evil." I encourage every technology company to adopt it. If you want to help fix patents, encourage your employer to.

专利承诺实际上是一个更狭窄但开源的“不作恶”。我鼓励每家科技公司都采纳它。如果你想帮助修复专利问题,请鼓励你的雇主这么做。

§ 8

Already most technology companies wouldn't sink to using patents on startups. You don't see Google or Facebook suing startups for patent infringement. They don't need to. So for the better technology companies, the patent pledge requires no change in behavior. They're just promising to do what they'd do anyway. And when all the companies that won't use patents on startups have said so, the holdouts will be very conspicuous.

大多数科技公司已经不屑于对初创公司使用专利。你不会看到谷歌或Facebook起诉初创公司专利侵权,它们不需要这么做。所以对于较好的科技公司来说,专利承诺不需要改变行为,它们只是承诺去做本来就会做的事。当所有不对初创公司使用专利的公司都表态后,那些顽固不化的公司就会非常显眼。

§ 9

The patent pledge doesn't fix every problem with patents. It won't stop patent trolls, for example; they're already pariahs. But the problem the patent pledge does fix may be more serious than the problem of patent trolls. Patent trolls are just parasites. A clumsy parasite may occasionally kill the host, but that's not its goal. Whereas companies that sue startups for patent infringement generally do it with explicit goal of keeping their product off the market.

专利承诺并不能解决专利的所有问题。例如,它阻止不了专利流氓——他们早已是过街老鼠。但专利承诺解决的问题可能比专利流氓问题更严重。专利流氓只是寄生虫,笨拙的寄生虫偶尔会杀死宿主,但这不是它的目的。而那些起诉初创公司专利侵权的公司,通常有着明确的目标:让初创公司的产品远离市场。

§ 10

Companies that use patents on startups are attacking innovation at the root. Now there's something any individual can do about this problem, without waiting for the government: ask companies where they stand.

那些对初创公司使用专利的公司是从根本上攻击创新。现在,任何个人都可以为解决这个问题做点什么,无需等待政府:去问公司他们的立场。

§ 11

Patent Pledge Site

Notes:

[ 1] Because the pledge is deliberately vague, we're going to need common sense when intepreting it. And even more vice versa: the pledge is vague in order to make people use common sense when interpreting it.So for example I've deliberately avoided saying whether the 25 people have to be employees, or whether contractors count too. If a company has to split hairs that fine about whether a suit would violate the patent pledge, it's probably still a dick move.

专利承诺网站

注释:

[1] 由于承诺是故意模糊的,我们在解释时需要运用常识。反之亦然:承诺之所以模糊,正是为了让人们在解释时运用常识。例如,我故意避免说明这25人必须是员工,还是也包括承包商。如果一家公司需要如此精细地划分界限来判断诉讼是否违反专利承诺,那么这很可能仍然是一种卑鄙的行为。

打开原文 ↗