OK, well, yet another US Patent that virtually any engineer with only two neurons left in their brain would say: "Yup, been there, done that". Patent number 5

OK, well, yet another US Patent that virtually any engineer with only two neurons left in their brain would say: "Yup, been there, done that". Patent number 5,946,647 describes recognizing text within strings and doing something with it. That's the basics. OK, well, that has been done since the very first computers were put to use. Let's see, yup, my HP41 calculator can do that. It was introduced in 1979. Let me remember...yup, computers before that date did that sort of thing too. What do interpreted language processors do? Scan strings for tokens and take actions based on what they find. Just check out the History of AI page on WikiPedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_artificial_intelligence http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_artificial_intellige... ...my guess is that most anything that this patent covers was probably already being done in the 1950's in some form. Modernizing the form to take advantage of, say, touch or the concept of links and new interfaces isn't invention, it is something that any skilled engineer would simply implement as part of applying the solution to new hardware. When are we going to stop granting patents for implementation rather than invention? Don't get me wrong. I love Apple. This isn't a jab at them. You have to use the system as it exists or someone else will plant a useless patent bomb in your face and stop you cold. They are using the system as they should, defensively and offensively. No problem with them or any other company, really. My problem is with the patent system and how it is granting patents for implementation rather than invention. Implementation simply requires stating a problem to someone skilled in the art. That person, in turn, is able to find a solution promptly. And so could thousands of others equally skilled in the art. Invention should have a much higher standard of proof or performance. More importantly, large companies have the financial horse-power to accumulate thousands and thousands of these "been there done that" patents. What this means is that those engaged in true innovation have to walk around in fear of running into this mine-field for the simple act of doing something that anyone skilled in the art would do as a matter of solving every-day problems. One of the best examples of how far the idiocy goes are a series of patents granted for the use of pulse width modulation for the control of the intensity of an LED light. This is something that is beyond obvious to any student of electronics. Yet another example of government incompetence at work? Perhaps the USPTO process should be privatized. Think about it. You could then file a lawsuit against the examining firm for approving a questionable application. That would stop the granting of patents for what amounts to prior art cold on its tracks. 'nuff said.