In practice, this opens an avenue for jurors' ethical sense to come into play, especially regarding non-practicing entities; and likability/worthiness of the pa

In practice, this opens an avenue for jurors' ethical sense to come into play, especially regarding non-practicing entities; and likability/worthiness of the patent-holder and their business practices. Of course, legally, this is a strong argument against the change. Can't have community ethical standards messing up patent law! Also: if more patents are held invalid, companies might apply for fewer, freeing up patent examiners to spend more time on each one (assuming their funding wasn't cut because of fewer applications...)