Summary: The debate about patents is taken over by non-practising entities

LET us restate the claim that the problem is not "bad" patents, the problem is that software patents, among other types of patents, are inherently bad. Gene Quinn, a patent lawyer and vocal proponent of software patents, says that "The Enforcement of Bad Patents is the Problem," once again evading the real issue. Paralegal Pamela Jones responds with: "That depends on whether or not you believe that software is mathematics and hence nonpatentable subject matter. Yet the patents keep on coming. The article is basically an advertisement for Article One's crowd sourcing of prior art searching, as if that is the solution. That alone makes me question Article One, frankly. But what nobody seems to grasp is that having to spend millions to defend against bad patents is the problem, and having to go through it at all means the solution he offers is the wrong answer."

She later rebutted other misleading pieces from Quinn (we try to reduce links to these), whom we wrote more about in [1, 2]. Advocating for trolls and parasites is being a watchdog for wrongdoers.

"Advocating for trolls and parasites is being a watchdog for wrongdoers."What we have here is the bias of patent lawyers. Some legal/lawyers' Web sites are still full of it. Dennis Crouch is just one example of this. They help themselves and businessmen tax scientists at great expense to society as a whole.

Here is belated news from a lawyers' site about Kappos leaving USPTO. They'll just need to find another lawyer to replace him.

It is clear that programmmers do not want software patents. The debate is rigged though. In Twitter, what seems like a lawyer keeps flooding the #swpats hashtag with pro-software patents tweets. We need to tackle this issue at the core; people who enable cartels are a major part of the problem. ⬆