I enjoyed reading it, but I have a few comments from a (non US) legal perspective. I also shared these in the substack. I put them here for discussion. A) One

I enjoyed reading it, but I have a few comments from a (non US) legal perspective. I also shared these in the substack. I put them here for discussion. A) One import aspect not hightlighted about the patent system is that it's intended to only verify the authenticity of a patent (substantially) if a conflict arises when the holder tries to enforce it. The checks to register a patent are comparatively minimal and formal. B) If companies file an ARP sample dated to the time they filed the patent they have already proven that they 'built' the software idea which the patent covers. The point of the patent is then to describe the application is sufficient detail that it may be enforced. If it is challenged the patent holder will have to prove his ARP meets the requirements of the patent. If it's too basic or the patent is too broad, the patent may well be invalidated. C) I am curious why there is so much emphasis on CRP patents. Are most software patents are CRP patents?