In former times (when patents mostly covered only machinery) you had to present a working prototype or product that demonstrated your invention. My suggested s

In former times (when patents mostly covered only machinery) you had to present a working prototype or product that demonstrated your invention. My suggested solution to the current software patent disaster: Inventors have to demonstrate a solution (in source code and running) that covers "ALL" the claims. Earlier inventions, e.g. those from the last 17 years, that have not provided this by means of ending up in a product during this period are automatically revoked / declared invalid. Inventors can appeal against this (at cost increasing the older the patent is). Demonstrations within appeals are only possible with technology available at the date of filing. This will automatically revoke all the fantasy patents (I call them Jules Verne Patents), bring sense back into patent filing - particularly when "pure front-end" patents are disqualified, and will help to protect us from the 1999/2000 patent litigation tsunami some are already expecting. (Reg: 1999/2000 patent litigation tsunami - this could be caused by all those start-up companies that filed patents within the 1999/2000 bubble and then went belly-up - many of those patents might soon end up in patent troll litigation portfolios.) Update: And patents should only be enforceable by practising entities vs. PAEs along the lines / to mitigate the issues that Google, Blackberry, Red Hat and Earthlink have outlined in their letter to the DOJ last Friday ( https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BwxyRPFduTN2VTE4TXlNcW9MR2s/view?pli=1&sle=true https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BwxyRPFduTN2VTE4TXlNcW9MR2s/... )