| Hm this is basically on the level of patenting pulling your wallet out of your green pocket to pay for a coffee at a street food shop. Or cutting wood with a knife to then use it to build a chair. I.e. while you need the result of the first part to do the second part, how you do the first part and how you do the second part are completely unrelated. Honestly given the large degree of economical damage such patent trolling does it's sad to see that laws hasn't been updated to involve serve penalties for anyone trying to abuse the patent system (if it's clear that it's an abuse like in this case). Like if it's such a obvious case like this: 1) Hold the suing person responsible for all financial costs of the defender, and a penalty and personal consequences for lawyer suing. 2) Make it a crime a create "deceptive" patents. Which are not clear in what they patent or clearly (for a person with knowledge of the topic) patent trivial or obvious things which should never bee palatable. 3) Make the patent office earn more money from catching clearly bad patents then from passing them through. Through only if it's "clear" abuse, whatever that means. |