It could create a whole new architecture for software - just the patented parts hosted remotely in software-patent-free zones while the rest is brought local to the customer. At least for the types of products where that works.
>while the rest is brought local to the customer //
Sounds like contributory infringement to me. Why not just host the entire thing distally and access via VPN?
The answer lies in where a product is considered to be sold. If you're targeting customers in the USA say then it doesn't matter where your server is you're still considered to be selling in the USA.
YMMV and I'm afraid I don't have any caselaw handy to cite on this.
I have to ask (I do t understand this stuff), how do you ban software from import - login to NZ server, pay, download?
Would a banner saying that people in the US are forbidden from doing this be enough to get the seller off the hook?
Inducing someone to infringe a patent valid in the US by importing (downloading) your product into the US is itself an infringement of the patent under 35 USC 271 (b). Even with the banner, plaintiff / prosecution lawyers could argue that you were inducing infringement - otherwise, why use a banner and not one of the widely available IP geolocation databases for an IP based block? Why, for example, sell to credit cards issued by US banks? Obviously, if you put more effective technical measures in place, but people from the US are, say, using a non-US proxy and paying by BitCoin, it might be easier to defend.
If someone in NZ breaks US law, there is then a question of whether they can face any consequences for it if they never leave NZ. Patents law has both a civil and a criminal aspect to it.
Under NZ civil law, the New Zealand courts can enforce civil judgements made against a New Zealand resident person, but only if the matter doesn't relate to taxes, and the person was either physically in the jurisdiction that made the judgement on the day the suit was filed, or the person takes any action in the foreign lawsuit other than arguing lack of jurisdiction.
New Zealanders can be extradited to face criminal charges abroad, but subject to the following test: "if the conduct of the person constituting the offence in relation to the extradition country, or equivalent conduct, had occurred within the jurisdiction of New Zealand at the relevant time it would, if proved, have constituted an offence punishable under the law of New Zealand for which the maximum penalty is imprisonment for not less than 12 months or any more severe penalty". That doesn't necessarily stop long and protracted proceedings - Kim Dotcom was probably protected by the safe harbour provisions under New Zealand copyright law.
Even if someone is safe from civil enforcement of a foreign judgement or criminal extradition, the US might still have power over them. For example, if they have assets in the US, they might not be safe. How do people pay to download the software - if it involves a payment system with US operations, like Visa or Mastercard, they might still be able to shut it down or garnish customer payments. Selling only by BitCoin might seriously hurt conversion rates.
