Here’s to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The troublemakers. The round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently. They’re not fond of rules. And they have no respect for the status quo. You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them. About the only thing you can’t do is ignore them. Because they change things. They push the human race forward. And while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius. Because the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world, are the ones who do. – Apple Inc.

Originally published on blog.hashtagify.me

For a long time the intellectual property of computer software could only be protected by the means of copyright laws. This meant that a developer who had an idea and wanted to make it a reality could do so without any fear: As long as he didn’t actually copy from someone else’s code, there was nothing to worry about.

This changed when patents started to be granted for software. With a software patent you are barred from reinventing something that someone else already invented and patented, even if you do it starting from scratch and without knowing anything about that patent. This means that you may be forced to pay to use your own idea, if someone else had it before you and already patented it – that is, if the patent holder even wants to license it to you.

To make a long story short, since 1996, when the patentability of software was officially regulated by the US Patent Office, the trickle of software patents issued in the US has become a deluge – over 16,000 just last year, for an accumulated number well over 100,000. And most of the “inventions” that those patents cover are far from revolutionary or from being something requiring years of research; on the contrary, most of them are very simple if not absolutely obvious. Something that most average programmers could reproduce by chance when solving a problem on their own.

So, if you have an idea and implement it in software today, it is quite possible that you will break at least one of those patents, without knowing it. This has been true for some time, but now there are more and more companies that are trying to profit from their patents by threatening to sue other companies, and even individual programmers, who might be infringing their portfolio – even if there is no competition whatsoever with the infringer.

This is bad news for developers, bad news for entrepreneurs, and bad news for consumers. The only good news is that the situation isn’t as bad everywhere – for example, here in Europe, at least for now, software patents are much more difficult to obtain. They are usually only granted when related to some industrial process, and the patentability of software “as such” is explicitly prohibited.

This means that European startups don’t have to worry so much about software patents in Europe itself, but if they want to get to the US market they fall under the same threat as their American counterparts; and to become a global player in software, success in Europe is not enough: You need to be validated in the US.

As a matter of fact, Europe has been the birthplace of many successful software startups, some of which have become global hits: Rovio and Spotify (which incidentally got sued the moment it landed in the US) just to cite a couple of the most recent ones, Skype and Mysql to talk about the most famous. But that’s nowhere near the number and the level seen in the US.

There are many theories about this difference, and as far as I know they never include a lack of talent as an explanation. The problem lies somewhere else. In my opinion, one of the biggest disadvantages European software startups have to face if compared to US – and especially Silicon Valley – new ventures is one related to visibility and credibility.

Success begets success. The attention of the tech world is focused on the US and even more on Silicon Valley. The simple fact that a startup is based there brings a higher visibility and bigger credibility, easier publicity, more funding. It’s not for nothing if so many foreign startups and entrepreneurs move to the Valley to seek their success.

As the pernicious effects of software patents start weighing in more and more, though, this could change. I’ve got nothing against the Silicon Valley or the US – I even have relatives living there – but this self-inflicted problem could create a big opportunity for European developers and entrepreneurs.

Europe is already the richest market for software in general, but its linguistic fragmentation, more conservative consumers and a tradition of US innovation make it less prominent than the US one. If the European Parliament resists the pressures to relax the European rules on software patents, though, and if the USA doesn’t change the track it put itself on, Europe could become the reference market for innovative software, especially for new web and mobile apps that would be riskier and riskier be bring to the market in the USA because of the threat of patent litigation.

An American market practically closed to innovators that don’t have very deep pockets and/or thousands of protective software patents to answer the threat from lawsuits would mean a poorer global market for everybody. But in that poorer global market European startups would be comparatively much better positioned than today.

And if lots of cool new things will start to happen in Europe,  startups based in Europe could gain the upper hand when it comes to visibility and credibility. There would still be problems of fragmentation and consumer attitude, but if the tipping point is reached that could be superseded by other effects. Even some American entrepreneurs, scared by patent litigation at home, may decide to move here, inverting the traditional trend of European startuppers who move to the US, and this influx of talent would create an even better environment and contribute to the change.

If not Europe, who could bear the baton of software startup innovation if the US were forced to pass it up? China or India could be two candidates, but for now Europe looks much better positioned to me, if anything else because the best software talent in those two giant countries is already soaked up by other booming industries.

In the end, I wish that the US will be able to sort out its growing mess with software patents soon, not just out of disinterested generosity but also because that would be better for the global economy. But if they stay on their current course – and it looks VERY difficult to me that that course will be changed substantially, considering the staggering amount of money that has already been invested in software patents – then we in Europe should try to be as ready as possible to receive the baton.

This should include lobbying to get even stricter rules for software patents, creating stronger ties between innovators and other such systemic measures. But, in my opinion, it could and should start first of all creating an awareness of the chance that European developers and entrepreneurs have in front of themselves.

The baton may be there for grab in a short time – a couple of years. What are we waiting for then? We should already be warming up.

iPhone, iPad, iOS. It’s getting a little crazy out there with 222 million iDevices, more than 300,000 apps, and dozens making over $1,000,000 in revenue. That’s why I’m very excited to announce a deal from the guys at Udemy on their online course “Learn to Develop iPhone & iPad Apps in 4 Weeks.”

The course is taught by Bess Ho, who is quickly becoming something of a silicon valley legend given her ability to take business folks (with zero programming skills) and have them build real functional apps in less than 6 hours. She teaches at places like Hacker Dojo, but if you can’t make it to a class she’s put together an awesome version of her course online at Udemy.com. It retails at $250, but the Udemy guys are hooking it up with 60% off making it $99 for this week only. Enjoy!

TheStartup.eu has partnered with Udemy to offer you the best courses for entrepreneurs and internet professionals. We’re starting with a super course on Raising Capital for Startups. Enjoy.

It’s happening again. Venture Capital is blowing up like its 1999, and there are thousands of angels investing in companies these days. Overwhelmed by this and not knowing where to start? Having trouble closing a round?

Well here’s the good news: investors are going to give someone their money. They have to give out a certain amount of capital each year and their trigger finger is hot. The bad news is that everyone else knows all the tricks. They know how to leverage middlemen into getting them introductions and how to squeeze interested investors into making decisions before they’re ready. And if you want some of those millions of dollars to float over to your company, you need to have those tricks in your arsenal.

Fortunately, we have a solution for you. Austin Startup has partnered with Udemy to provide you with an amazing deal on one of their online courses:”Raising Capital for Startups“. The Austin Startup community gets it at 60% off or $39 (retail price $99).

It features some of the biggest brands in raising capital - Dave McClure (who funds like 200 companies a year), Naval Ravikant (who sees about 2,000 deals a year) and Jay Jamison (who invests in startups for a living). Oh, and don’t forget Adeo Ressi - this man wrote the handbook on raising venture capital.

Each of these fundraising gurus tells you how they did it and the secrets they employed. The course gives you everything you need to know “Before You Raise Money”, including “How to Write a Killer Pitchdeck”, and how to “Get Meetings with Angels and VC’s”. There’s even a lawyer from one of the top venture law firms in the world to explain the legal terminology in those ever so elusive term sheets. The course has - 7 lectures, 45 minutes each, plus bonus material like sample e-mails sent to real VC’s.

So if you think there’s a chance you may ever want to hit up investors for cash, definitely check out ”Raising Capital for Startups.”

Peak Games, the flourishing emerging markets social gaming company, today announced a $5 million Series-A investment to foster continued growth in some of the fastest-growing markets in the world including Turkey and MENA (Middle East North Africa). The round is led by Earlybird Venture Capital, one of Europe’s most successful, early-stage technology investors. The funding will enable Peak Games to execute on aggressive growth plans as the company solidifies its position as a global player in the expanding market for social games. Part of Peak Games’ success has been driven by how the company reaches underserved markets with localized and culturally-specific games that employ strong engagement and monetization strategies.

“The success Peak Games has had to date proves that the  next big game genres on Facebook will offer culturally-relevant content and deliver a fully localized experience,” said Jason Whitmire, partner at Earlybird Venture Capital. “We believe that this investment will support the company as it taps the rapidly-growing social gaming potential in emerging markets.”

Peak Games, was launched by Sidar Sahin, one of Turkey and the Middle East’s most prolific entrepreneurs and most respected gaming experts in October 2010.

Three leading Baltic „internet daily deals“ companies Cherry.ee, Beta.lt and Grupinis.lt have signed a merger agreement, creating one of the region’s largest internet commerce companies with almost 1 million Euros in monthly gross turnover.
Each month, over 0.5 million people visit Cherry, Beta.lt and Grupinis.lt sites to discover new offers by restaurants, spas, concert organizers, travel operators and benefit from steep discounts which may be as high as 70% from the regular price. More than 1300 merchants across Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania have used this unique and extremely effective advertising channel to promote their goods or services so far.

All three companies were launched in spring and summer 2010 and quickly gained wide popularity among internet audience, especially among women who account for 70% of the purchases. Cherry  operates cherry.ee, the largest daily deal site in Estonia, and cherry.lv, No 2 in Latvia. Beta.lt and Grupinis.lt are the largest daily deal sites in Lithuania.

The merged company had a gross turnover of 0.94 m EUR in March and it commands over 50% market share in the Baltics among similar companies. All three companies were owned by founders and private angel investors. The merger was completed through stock swap.

„We were very quick to find common language with our Lithuanian partners as we share common background and passion to this business. This is true merger of the equals,“ said CEO of Cherry Media Priit Tomp.

„Our pan-Baltic merger creates an undisputed leader of this industry. It allows us to exchange the best practicies, carry out pan-Baltic campaigns and be very strong partner to our customers and merchants,“ said Aldas Kirvaitis, co-founder of Grupinis.lt.

The daily deals business model originates from the U.S. where it was pioneered in 2008 by Groupon, the fastest-growing company in internet’s history. Similarily, the Baltic daily deals companies achieved almost 1 million EUR in monthly gross turnover in less than one year. Never has any Baltic internet company achieved such turnovers so fast.

Over less than 12 months, the merged company has sold 424 000 vouchers for goods and services, saving over 6,3 m EUR for customers and creating steady flow of new customers to merchants who have used this sales channel. In certain cases, Cherry was able to sell 20% of the merchant’s annual business volume in one day.

„We are on course to become the largest Baltic internet company in 1-2 years time. We have already passed Delfi, if compared by turnover,“ said Andres Susi, the co-founder of Cherry Media.

Cherry was founded in April 2010 by Andres Susi, a partner in MTVP venture capital company, Priit Tomp, Cherry’s CEO, Marius Andra, lead developer and several other co-founders. They were joined by Allan Martinson, the managing partner in MTVP and co-founder of the Baltic News Service and Delfi, as well as Janis and Normunds Bergs, prominent Latvian technology investors.

Cherry opened its Latvian site cherry.lv in February and achieved No 2 position on Latvian market in less than 3 months. Cherry.lv is headed by Girts Slavins, former CEO of the largest Latvian social network draugiem.lv.

Grupinis.lt was developed by Dealcraft, a subsidiary of Blue Ant Holdings, an investment company which also owns ONE.LT, the largest local social network in Lithuania. Blue Ant Holdings has been founded by Aldas Kirvaitis, Vilius Juraitis, Romualdas Dumčius and Šarūnas Chomentauskas.

Beta.lt was founded by Alvydė Palaimaitė and MAKE Ventures, an investment firm owned by Ilja Polivanovas and Mantas Rauckis.

The companies will continue using the same brands after merger: cherry.ee, seller.ee and cherrygift.ee in Estonia, cherry.lv in Latvia, beta.lt and grupinis.lt in Lithuania.

The company’s board will consist of 5 members: Allan Martinson, Priit Tomp, Andres Susi, Aldas Kirvaitis and Ilja Polivanovas. The merged company employs 45 people across the Baltics.

I’m happy to announce that we’re gladly continuing our media partnership with Finovate, the leading conference in innovative financial services startups.

Finovate, after holding their first European conference, will return to San Francisco on May 10 and 11, with an expanded two-day showcase of dozens of the biggest and most innovative new ideas in financial and banking technology. As a subscriber of TheStartup, you are eligible for a special discount – see below for more details.

Last year’s event sold out, so the event has moved to a larger venue in 2011 to keep up with demand. FinovateSpring offers an unparalleled opportunity to watch the cutting edge of banking and financial technology unfold, along with the chance to network with hundreds of leading financial executives, venture capitalists, press, industry analysts, bloggers, and fintech entrepreneurs. With only 7 minutes afforded to each demoing company, no other event packs as much unique value into just two
days.

After completing its extensive screening process, FinovateSpring is pleased to announce the following companies who will be demoing this May in San Francisco:

Afiniate, Aptys Solutions, Arroweye Solutions, Backbase, Balance Financial, BancVue, Bill.com, Billeo, BillFloat, Bills.com, BillShrink, Braintree, Bundle, ChargeSmart, Clovr Media, Code Green, Crossroads Financial Technologies, Currensee, doxo, Dwolla, edo Interactive, Enloop, eWise, Expensify, Experian, Figlo, Fiserv, Gold Bullion International, Gratio Capital, HelloWallet, HOYOS, ID Analytics, Ideon, Intellaegis, Kabbage, Kiboo, Kony Solutions, Lend Street, Lendio, Liqpay.com, Mint.com, MyBankTracker.com, oFlows, Pageonce, PayDivvy, PayNearMe, PayPal/Discover, peerTransfer, ProfitStars, Q2ebanking, Ready Receipts, Silver Tail Systems, TILE Financial, TrustedID, Wikinvest, Wipro, and Xero.

In addition to the above companies, a handful of stealth startups and large established players will be announced closer to the conference date.

As part of theStartup’s partnership with Finovate, we’ve negotiated a special discount specifically for our members. On the registration page, simply enter the discount code TheStartupSpring to save 10% off the ticket price. Regular tickets will be available until April 29, but tickets are going fast – register now to lock in your spot!

For more information or to register for FinovateSpring, visit www.finovatespring.com.

This is a guest post by Scoop.it CEO Guillaume Decugis, explaining why he believes the curated web should be the future of the Social Web.

Social Media lets everyone speak all the time. So what happens? Noise. Not just that of course: great content gets shared, inspiring ideas get tweeted and retweeted, interesting analysis spread, etc… but who never felt overwhelmed by the amount of content we receive on Facebook, Twitter, blogs and whatever other forms of social media we use. A lot of people wrote about how this perceived information overload prevents readers from finding signal in the noise (including myself) and how we badly needed new filters.

But there’s another problem:
In that noise, how can you be a voice that gets heard? How can you be relevant? How can you find your audience?
As a teenager, I wanted to be a novel writer: I loved reading and I loved writing. And now I’m a Web Entrepreneur. So how come I never managed to start a blog?
If not having a blog seems to be tolerate, “As a Tech Entrepreneur, you have to be on Twitter”, seems to be a must you cannot discuss.

Sadly, I admit that’s how I got onto it. Not because I fell in love with it, nor because I felt I could be heard. Actually I was terrified by just the opposite: sure, tweeting was simple, but starting at 0 followers (well not exactly, my teammates were kind enough to follow me so make it 10…), how could I be heard when Robert Scoble was already broadcasting at 1,000 miliscobles to thousands of people?
Social media had brought us great engagement and resulted in great sharing activity but that one thing had been lost in the way: meaning. A lot of people were saying we needed curation. Not just in the sense of filtering : curating is not only about selecting, it’s also about highlighting and sharing content with analysis or comments that give it a specific – and most of the time subjective – meaning. Blogs had been focusing people’s energy on becoming writers or journalists. That’s good. But we felt we now needed to bring people’s energy on collectively creating this meaning out of all that produced content.

Are we social if we do not listen to each other?
After a hectic start, there’s one thing I discovered getting on Twitter: no one seemed to listen to me. Unlike on Facebook where my friends do care enough to react to my lame jokes, I’m not a celebrity so no one gives a damn that I’m in a night club having a great time. But when I started tweeting on what I knew well (eg iphone app marketing, a topic we pioneered at the time), I got re-tweeted or replied. And finding out what to tweet also became easy. Focusing on topics seems to solve both inspiration and the getting-heard problem.

The idea behind Scoop.It is simple but more and more necessary in a world of digital abundance: with lots of content available out there, you’re probably better off giving your own twist, your witty comment or your smart sarcasm to an article or a video made by someone else rather than duplicate content or write yet-another-blog-post on something already covered a dozen times. And if the platform is designed to help you find the right content, it’s much easier.
Expression through curation. To tell your story on your topic, I think it definitely matters.
If, like Valeria Maltoni (who recently gave a great speech on influence at SxSWi), ”[you] didn’t start a blog to be influential but because [you] had a voice”, you should join us and start a topic.

Nothing is more addictive than being heard.

Michael L. Smolens, Founder and Chairman of dotSUB, announced today the appointment of David Orban as Chief Executive Officer of dotSUB, the leading technology provider powering video viewing in multiple languages.

David is the chairman of Humanity+, founder and Chief Evangelist of WideTag, Inc., advisor to the prestigious Singularity University, a Scientific Advisory Board Member for the Lifeboat Foundation and founder of the Open Government Data.

His educational background includes studies in Physics at both the University of Milan and the University of Padua. Born in Budapest, Hungary, he and his family currently live in northern Italy, near Milan.

“David Orban brings a wealth of experience as CEO of international technology start-ups, software distributors and online communities, so he is the perfect person to manage dotSUB’s hyper-growth over the coming years,” says Smolens.

“David is in sync with my vision of removing language as a barrier to cross-cultural communications, as well as building dotSUB into a truly global business,” states Smolens. “I also plan to stay actively involved with our activities as Chairman.”

dotSUB powers online videos with translations in all languages across the Internet and mobile screens around the world. The company generates local connections to global businesses, educational institutions and public agencies such as Adobe, GE, TED, The Port Authority of NY / NJ, and the U.S. Army.
“I’m excited to lead a team building language bridges across cultures. Video usage is exploding, and dotSUB provides high quality, audience engagement and international reach. Seeing dotSUB’s crowd-sourcing platform empowering organizations like the TED conferences publishing more than 16,000 TED Talks with captions and subtitles in 88 languages-all with 6,000 volunteer translators-that’s inspiring” stated Orban.

This is a guest contribution by Katheryn Rivas, who regularly writes for online
universities. She welcomes your comments by email.

One thing the history of entrepreneurship shows us is that the startups that initially resist bids
to take them over often do much better in the long term. One only has to look at the paragon
of startup achievement, Mark Zuckerberg’s famous Facebook, to see that theme in action.
Zuckerberg was reportedly turning down offers of around $1 billion USD from the likes of
Yahoo. Since then, Facebook has grown to be worth around $75 billion USD.

Certainly, this hasn’t always been the case with startups that turn down takeover offers, and it
won’t be the last of that sort of problem either. Groupon’s recent resistance to Google’s rumored
offer of $6 billion USD could spell disaster for the company, especially if Google gets into the
daily deal market with its own applications. Of course, we’ll have to wait and see in that respect.

So what are some other companies that have fared well when they turned down initial takeover
offers? Well, recently, The New York Times reported that Canadian fertilizer mining group
Potash resist a bid, with the help of the Candaian government, from BHP Billiton to buy the
group for $130 a share. As of February 2011, Potash’s value had risen to $190 a share and seem
to steadily increase. Another Canadian startup company, Casey’s General Stores, is now worth
more than what Alimentation Couche-Tard offered to pay for it.

We can learn from this trend that founders of startup companies are being more responsible in
the decisions to sell a company. No longer are startup founder strictly looking for a quick sale
to make lots of money. We’ve seen more and more startups approach potential takeovers with a
longer term goal. Of course, sure, the founders wish to still make some money, but they are also
looking to make sure that the takeover will continue to benefit themselves and their employees.
They want to know how exactly the continued function of their startup will fit into the overall
vision of the takeover company, for example.

So if you’re a startup founder and you’re being offered a takeover bid, then you should know
that hesitation could be your best option. Ask the company that’s making the offer about the
nature of the takeover. Bargain for benefits on your terms. Don’t feel pressured into taking the
first thing that comes your way. If the work you do is truly great, then you’ll have plenty of other
opportunities to sell the company in the future.