>>How is this not obvious to the skilled practitioner?
>
>The modern patent system does not check for novelty when the patent is
>filed and granted, only when a breech is brought to court. The sad
>effect is that companies with a lot of muscle power (money to hire
>lawyers and sit out long court cases) can get by with both having lost
>of trivial patents, and ignoring non-trivial patents of smaller
>companies.

In other words, the patent system is a revenue system for the legal
system, as they benefit from the application fees, and more so from any
lawsuits connected with them, since whoever wins, the courts get paid.  I
would call this a win/win situation. Sort of like a state monopoly on
something important. Makes their desire to maintain the system as is very
understandable imho. There is no penalty whatsoever to the elements of the
legal system for awarding a wrongful patent, on the contrary, they get
rewarded for any mistakes by being paid to review it. Hmm, I see great
perspectives for a money-making scheme here.

Peter

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics