While the authors post seems to try to critique a US legal issue, the auto-generated ambiguous nonsense content is kind of disrespectful to readers. Having gon

While the authors post seems to try to critique a US legal issue, the auto-generated ambiguous nonsense content is kind of disrespectful to readers. Having gone though the Patent process several times, I have observed the following: 1. The company president was primarily focused on locking down the business IP anyway possible. This also bumped the valuation by around $300k each time. 2. People will clone low-hanging fruit, and simply ignore patent trolls in places Software Patents aren't valid. Note, going after users for dimes is a bad business model. 3. The author/programmer usually solves some key feature for a business use-case, and submits the draft to an IP legal firm. First-to-file patent systems essentially get flooded with business-intelligence cloners, and novelty can become rather illusive. 4. The lawyers and business owners try to strip any sensitive information, create the most generalized abstract interpretation of the IP, and convert English into obfuscated legalese. People want to capture a market, sue savvy cloners, and seize competitors inventory which _may_ violate IP. 5. The entire Patent is basically just describing the context of how the claims section is to be interpreted, and how the IP is related to other IP class areas. Note, generally this also means only the claims section itself at the end of the Patent is actually enforceable. 6. In a global economy, the cost to enforce IP is beyond the reach of most startup budgets. Thus, overly aggressive business owners tend to go bankrupt trying to imitate a large firms policies, and discover most funding channels will give a hard "No" to chasing Patent rights. 7. The best plans don't require secrecy, offer economic incentives encouraging competitor cooperation, and punish cloners in a tit-for-tat model. 8. While technically it was only a few thousand dollars to challenge pending Patents, as far as I can tell it is a very rare occurrence due to the volume of works. Personally, I think once source-code is published it should fall under copyright , and invalidate current/future associated Patents. =)