I have a question: what makes software different from other disciplines/domains with regards to patents? Why are "software patents" more often pointed out as pointless than other kinds of patents?
Software patents have a strong tendency to be both vague and obvious. Although these are supposed to make something unpatentable, this doesn't happen in practice with software patents (possibly due to the relative novelty of software and lack of understanding among non-technical people).
- write software, and
- don't stand to benefit directly from software patents.
Kind of troll, kind of serious. Consider the source and all that. I also think software patents are dumb, but then again I also don't stand to benefit from them and I write software.