I'm not sure whether to mention this, but here goes. I refused to help a company I worked for create a patent, despite the large cash incentive to do so. I didn't want to have my name on a patent for two reason: firstly, I thought companies, especially startups, would increasingly see even engineers who collaborate with the patent system in a negative light. Yammer has proved me right.
Secondly, I didn't want to be personally responsible for making the patent situation worse. Worse? Yes, because despite the assertion made that obviously a good company like ours would only use patents defensively, this was not backed up with any public statement to that effect, nor would even that be binding in the future when management changed or the patent portfolio was sold. Every defensive patent can be used offensively.
The suggestion of a defensive silicon valley patent pool (perhaps owned by some kind of internet foundation), more rights for inventors to control how their patents are used, and pressuring engineers not to collaborate in the creation of bad patents would be a good way out of the current madness without requiring a total overhaul.
Secondly, I didn't want to be personally responsible for making the patent situation worse. Worse? Yes, because despite the assertion made that obviously a good company like ours would only use patents defensively, this was not backed up with any public statement to that effect, nor would even that be binding in the future when management changed or the patent portfolio was sold. Every defensive patent can be used offensively.
The suggestion of a defensive silicon valley patent pool (perhaps owned by some kind of internet foundation), more rights for inventors to control how their patents are used, and pressuring engineers not to collaborate in the creation of bad patents would be a good way out of the current madness without requiring a total overhaul.