What If VisiCalc Had Been Patented?

from the innovation dept

Dan Bricklin, the creator of the first spreadsheet program, VisiCalc, has been mentioned in a number of articles recently concerning the issue of software patents, and he's now speaking up about the basic question of what would have happened if he'd been able to patent VisiCalc. He's responding to someone who suggests that the lack of a patent on VisiCalc slowed innovation by making everyone just copy VisiCalc. Bricklin responds smartly (of course) by pointing out that this wasn't true at all. First, plenty of others tried to come up with other, completely different systems to replace spreadsheets -- and none caught on. At the same time, Lotus and Microsoft took what Bricklin (and others) did early on and made them even better and more useful for the market. It all goes back to the same thing we've spoken about in the past. There's a big difference between invention and innovation -- and it's the innovation that helps the economy. However, patents protect invention, not innovation. While a lack of patents may have kept some money out of Bricklin's pockets, it did allow for more focused work on making the spreadsheet better for the market -- and in the end that helped the economy much more, by letting competition and the market drive innovation, rather than a government granted monopoly.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 13th, 2005 @ 1:14am

    No Subject Given

    Yup.
    That's a clear analysis. Invention usually starts a product, then people find new ways to use it, expand on it, extend in unexpected directions. Patents are the roadblock to innovation, not the stimulus, unless you buy the "economic incentive" argument.
    I thought it was interesting that other people came up with other competing systems to Visicalc. What could those have been, I wonder?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Aug 13th, 2005 @ 12:56pm

      Tracked down some spreadsheet alternatives.

      I tracked down some of those competing systems for myself. From Dan Bricklin's article:
      We even tried one at Software Arts with TK!Solver, and Lotus tried Improv. Then there was T-Maker, Javelin, etc., etc.
      TK Solver is still out there. A successor to Improv is Quantrix. You can find a Javelin Software Wikipedia reference, too. Anyone know of a product with self-documentation features similar to the old Javelin DOS product? Did Oracle buy it up to produce something similar later?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous of Course, Aug 13th, 2005 @ 5:17pm

        Re: Tracked down some spreadsheet alternatives.

        I still use TK!Solver. I also use Excel and Mathcad but TK has some handy features that none of the others have. Innovation is most often evolutionary rather than revolutionary. Only a person that has never designed stuff would fail to see that. I used to torment a fellow who always wanted a unique design by suggesting every solution that I could imagine... effectively ruling them out. MWUAH HA HA!

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Barry Phillips, Sep 5th, 2005 @ 4:32pm

        Re: Tracked down some spreadsheet alternatives.

        Over the last seven years we have developed a program to fill the gap between spreadsheets and professional mathematical programs, getting over the main limitations of spreadsheets. Comes into its own where spreadsheet run out of steam.
        Already developed a number of models.
        Would love to hear from anyone interested in modelling.
        Structure thousands of Sheets for easy navigation
        Tens, hundreds or even thousands of Sheets can be structured in an alterable tree like structure for easy navigation and a clear understanding of any model.
        Note: In Atebion we enforce you to structure your model, even if the structure is unique to you.
        Model the way you work and in a way you know how
        By using Equations instead of formula you can model the way you work without thinking how to convert your understanding of the tasks to formula(s), this also makes it easier for others to follow your logic.
        Goal seek without re-designing your model
        After you have defined your relationships in Atebion you can reverse any inputs and outputs. This gives you the ability to goal seek without editing a single Equation.

        Find logical errors within a model
        Special and unique diagnostic tools identify logical errors in Atebion. Such cases as unsolvable task or unstable (continuous) solutions are highlighted by the program and errors are easily traced in most models.

        Model feedback processes
        Many real systems involve feedback processes ‘A’ depends on ‘B’ which itself depends on ‘A’. In reality these situations involve simultaneous Equations that Atebion solves automatically. As an example this is ideal for cross charging overheads.

        Diagnostics
        Atebion will display a list of all Equations acting on a Variable and all Variables involved in a particular Equation. By alternately selecting Equations and Variables you can “drill down” through a system of Equations to identify how a value is derived. Look at what a variable depends on and influences on.

        Follow the logic of a model a year on
        Each Variable is identified by its own descriptive name. Equations appear in standard language such as:
        [Total Fixed Cost Prod A] + [Total Variable Cost Prod A] =
        [Unit Cost Prod A] * [Total Work Load Prod A]
        Avoiding unintelligible Cell references and for any object can be applied a comment.

        Only one equation is needed for each rule
        You only need one set of equations to act on similar sheets such as in our standard costing model where you could have hundreds of product sheets yet only need to validate one sheet and just keep adding others as and when needed.

        Interactive graphs
        Up to six different graphs may be seen in one screen view; each may represent data from different sheets. Click your mouse on any point on any graph and see immediately the sheet with the corresponding variable highlighted or highlight a variable and see the corresponding point on the respective graph.
        Different users may have their own saved graphs.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Michael Clouser, Aug 13th, 2005 @ 7:26am

    Innovation

    Good find, Mike.

    Innovation is a process within the context of the marketplace. Indeed so much more than simply inventions, true innovation is a continuous interplay between the intellect, the product (or service), and the marketplace.

    If we think about it, the current patent system could actually be one of economic disincentive.

    -It demotivates other creatives from improving on an existing invention, either through product development or marketplace adaptation.

    -The expense of the patent process, in terms of time and money, is especially burdensome to entrepreneurs in the early stage.

    -Other expenses such as patent defense line the wallets of lawyers and waste valuable time and money of innovative firms.

    -Universities spend their sparse resources on protecting IP, and then more resources marketing it. Entrepreneurs and established innovative firms on the outside often "pass" licensing such inventions since the economics of the deal seem lopsided and favor the university. IP sits on the shelves of universities, and is hidden away for all intensive purposes. TTOs fight with faculty and students over IP rights. Many potential startups that would transfer technology and innovation dry heave at this point and die for the potential founders (academic entrepreneurs or surrogate entrepreneurs) are unwilling to move forward with the economics of the deal that seem tilted towards the university.

    Complicated issue, but a lot of fun to discuss.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 14th, 2005 @ 10:58pm

    Why?

    I believe Dan understood the difference between *hypocrisy* and *intellectual property*.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Ken Dakin, Dec 9th, 2006 @ 2:45am

    Visicalc patentability

    Visicalc would not have been patentable because of "prior art" - namely the 'Works Records sysyem' developed at ICI around 1974 (five/six years earlier).It had backup/recovery/multiple shared users/security and remote data update all built in to the original specification. It also prevented many illogical operations to take place (eg multiplying inches by inches or kilograms by pounds - think mars lander!).See Wikipedia article "spreadsheet"

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Ken Dakin, Dec 9th, 2006 @ 2:45am

    Visicalc patentability

    Visicalc would not have been patentable because of "prior art" - namely the 'Works Records sysyem' developed at ICI around 1974 (five/six years earlier).It had backup/recovery/multiple shared users/security and remote data update all built in to the original specification. It also prevented many illogical operations to take place (eg multiplying inches by inches or kilograms by pounds - think mars lander!).See Wikipedia article "spreadsheet"

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 11th, 2007 @ 3:34pm

    aaaaaaaaaaaa

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 11th, 2007 @ 3:35pm

    techdirt sucs my dirty balls

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 26th, 2007 @ 3:07pm

    MY BALLS TOO!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Justin Case, Mar 31st, 2008 @ 5:04pm

    To Patent or Not To Patent?

    Let's try this:

    1. You come up with a great product idea, something completely unique in the marketplace.

    2. You start a company and market the product.

    3. Big Evil Inc. and several others blatantly copy your ideas and eventually crush you.

    Is this fair, a case of "the market sorting itself out"? Or is it an example of why patents are necessary?

    Nevermind that patents today are only as good as the lawyers behind them...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2012 @ 2:12pm

    Patents are necessary. Software patents are not.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    nreyntje (profile), Jul 16th, 2013 @ 5:02am

    Patents are needed!

    I am creating the successor of spreadsheets. Its a file system that can calculate. Hard to explain but its much more powerful than conventional spreadsheets.

    If it was not for patents I would have made no effort to build this product, since there simply is no outcome where I could win.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This