Moreover, let's go outside your paradigm of costs, and do a thought experiment that assumes that it is solved. Even then, this would be a bad solution, because

Moreover, let's go outside your paradigm of costs, and do a thought experiment that assumes that it is solved. Even then, this would be a bad solution, because it takes too much time for either side. If you are a genuine inventor, and have a truly novel, original, valuable invention, you want the patent to deployed and fully enforceable as rapidly and fully as possible. Waiting years for multiple cases to sift their way through the courts only allows others to infringe for those years. Even if you rightly collect judgements in the end, those are unlikely to make up for the market leadership opportunity cost you lost to the infringers. If, OTOH, you are a small-medium business being sued for a bad patent, you also want it clearly defined that the patent is invalid, so you can move on. Waiting for multiple courts to decide only costs you more money, distraction, and market opportunity. What is really good for everyone is a very serious, fully funded, fully staffed and highly competent National Patent Office, which can effectively and reliably determine patent-ability, and is widely respected for its expertise. That is best for everyone because there are clear boundaries. It would also mean far fewer patents because there are a LOT of junk patents out there.