The answer apparently is 'because the US legal system doesn't work'.
>In practice, therefore, an issued patent is a valid patent //
Well no. An invalid patent is still invalid even if you use it to badger someone in to paying for a license. If that person knows that it's invalid, eg because they know of certain publicly available prior art, then it is their choice whether to pay for a license or follow a legal remedy.
If a legal remedy is uninviting because of problems with the legal system this does not mean that "software patents are not fixable" it means that the legal system in general is poor.
> If a legal remedy is uninviting because of problems with the legal system this does not mean that "software patents are not fixable" it means that the legal system in general is poor.
Rather, he assumes that the legal system is poor, and reasons from that viewpoint. It's correct today, it'll be correct tomorrow, and it's unlikely to be different anytime soon.
Comments
The answer apparently is 'because the US legal system doesn't work'.
>In practice, therefore, an issued patent is a valid patent //
Well no. An invalid patent is still invalid even if you use it to badger someone in to paying for a license. If that person knows that it's invalid, eg because they know of certain publicly available prior art, then it is their choice whether to pay for a license or follow a legal remedy.
If a legal remedy is uninviting because of problems with the legal system this does not mean that "software patents are not fixable" it means that the legal system in general is poor.
> If a legal remedy is uninviting because of problems with the legal system this does not mean that "software patents are not fixable" it means that the legal system in general is poor.
Rather, he assumes that the legal system is poor, and reasons from that viewpoint. It's correct today, it'll be correct tomorrow, and it's unlikely to be different anytime soon.