David Forslund wrote:
What I have a problem is properly identifying "prior art". The background
papers clearly cover these issues long before these patents were submitted, but only in a general way by describing
the general problem that the patent is dealing with in the specific.
I would go so far as to say that many patents don't describe a solution
at all, but describe the problem in terms of e.g. use cases or
scenarios, which contain perhaps small design ideas here and there. But
mostly I get the impression from patents I have read that the authors
are not trying to protect an invention, but trying to protect the niche
which they have realised exists, and in which they think (given some
more time) they might be able to create an invention - they are trying
to grab a piece of the problem space for themselves and charge anyone
money for creating inventions that solve the problem they have described.
- thomas
