A patent should only be allowed on something fundamental, conceptual, highly novel, and unprecedented, and there should be a significant burden of proof on the

A patent should only be allowed on something fundamental, conceptual, highly novel, and unprecedented, and there should be a significant burden of proof on the patenter to prove all that. Agreed, except I would substitute "tangible" for "conceptual," as the current laxness in the system could, arguably, be attributed to a departure from a tangibility requirement.