There's a distinct category of "plant patents" which are more limited in scope to the typical "utility" patents. The CAFC has ruled that the availability of pl

There's a distinct category of "plant patents" which are more limited in scope to the typical "utility" patents. The CAFC has ruled that the availability of plant patents does not exclude plants from utility patent protection, which has made plant patents obsolescent. I'm not too familiar with that area of law, but as I understand it some of the bad behavior from Monsanto et al. wouldn't have been possible under the plant patent system. In an ideal world I'd like a distinct patenting regime for software - shorter patent lifespans, compulsory licensing on reasonable and non-discriminatory terms, a broader experimental use right encompassing most non-commercial users - but if the CAFC is just going to fold it into the maximalism of utility patents, why bother?