Serious questions continue to exist within the information technology field about the PTO's software-related patent decisions. Second, the tradition of independent creation in the field of computer programming may run counter to assumptions and practices associated with patents as they are applied to its traditional domains. When someone patents a component of a manufactured system, for example, it will generally be possible for the inventor to manufacture that component or license its manufacture to another firm and reap rewards from the invention by sale of that component. Rights to use the invention are cleared by buying the component for installation into a larger device. But there is little or no market in software components.
Programmers routinely design large and complex systems from scratch.
With tens of thousands of programmers writing code that could well infringe on hundreds of patents without their knowing it, there is an increased risk of inadvertent infringement. An added disincentive to searching the patent literature is the danger that learning about an existing patent would increase the risk of being found to be a willful infringer. Much the same could be said about the mismatch between patents and information inventions in general. Third, although patents seem to have been quite successful in promoting investments in the development of innovative manufacturing and other industrial technologies and processes, it is possible that they will not be as successful in promoting innovation in the information economy. One concern is that the pace of innovation in information industries is so rapid, and the gears of the patent system are so slow, that patents may not promote innovation in information industries as well as they have done in the manufacturing economy.