One of my biggest complaints about the current state of patents is that it reverses the process of innovation. I have not heard of anyone reading existing paten

One of my biggest complaints about the current state of patents is that it reverses the process of innovation. I have not heard of anyone reading existing patents to get new ideas for software. Instead, we invariably invent first, usually oblivious to the existence, or not, of relevant patents. Then we search (or are informed) that our new product falls within the scope of an existing patent and decide whether to license it or iteratively re-invent to find a solution that does not infringe. Consider the various compositions of linked lists that are patented (http://www.google.com/patents/US7028023 http://www.google.com/patents/US7028023), any of which would be casually "re-invented" by any competent developer. The USPTO should give the world more credit for "obviousness". I propose that the closure of established concepts under the algebra of established compositional operations shall be considered "obvious", in which case we can all go about applying those compositional operations without worrying about stumbling over patented combinations.