The whole "protecting intellectual property" thing could work if it was possible to issue patents in an unbiased and consistent way but patent examiners are human beings and they do some research on the issue, read the arguments from the patent lawyers and come to a (usually biased) decision. You even see cases where a patent is rejected 9 times and get accepted the 10th time. It is extremely difficult to come up with an unbiased, consistent and all-knowing (past work) way to issue patents, I'm not even sure if it's possible at all. And that's another reason why there should be no patents issued at least in the software industry.
Comments
The whole "protecting intellectual property" thing could work if it was possible to issue patents in an unbiased and consistent way but patent examiners are human beings and they do some research on the issue, read the arguments from the patent lawyers and come to a (usually biased) decision. You even see cases where a patent is rejected 9 times and get accepted the 10th time. It is extremely difficult to come up with an unbiased, consistent and all-knowing (past work) way to issue patents, I'm not even sure if it's possible at all. And that's another reason why there should be no patents issued at least in the software industry.