After much ado recently about stupid patent applications and controversy over the actual purpose of the (US) patent system, the New York Times has come out in favour of what every sane person knows: patents are supposed to encourage innovation, not to prevent competition.
Following the recent NY Times article on how tax strategies are getting patented, the paper has come out with an opinion piece about how our patent system is broken and rewarding exactly the opposite behavior that it was intended to encourage: "Patents are supposed to encourage innovation, rewarding the individual for the greater good of society. But excessive or overly broad patents can slow business activity to the pace of cold molasses." This isn't anything new to plenty of folks, of course. However, it is good to see a publication like the NY Times make the point as well.