[dboreham]

>Please provide some kind of basis to this claim.

Well...I think all the basis is likely to be anecdotal unless someone performs a survey.

One data point: I've been doing this stuff for decades and I have never had reason to _read_ a patent filing. That has to indicate something, no? If they were so "inventive" wouldn't we need to read them to find out about new inventions. The only patents I've read were a) ones where I was the named inventor (even then I didn't understand them) and b) where I was employed as an expert by lawyers fighting trolls in litigation.

[kstrauser]

This exactly. The point of patents is to encourage people to publish their research, but I've literally never heard of anyone reading through software patents to get ideas. The entire putative reason for their existence is basically mythical.

Furthermore, our company lawyer would probably choke me if he caught me reading patents, as then we'd be subject to much higher damages if we were ever claimed to be infringing something.

[ehvatum]

>I've been doing this stuff for decades and I have never had reason to _read_ a patent filing

Knowing of a software patent exposes you to willful infringement, and you'd need a lawyer to understand what the bloody hell most software patents are even claiming to patent.

[kemitchell]

I'd venture to guess you've read several "white papers" or even academic papers describing inventions claimed by patents.