Let&#x27;s not reduce this argument to innovation for <i>companies</i>.  Individuals innovate and patent as well.<p>There is a tendency to focus purely on the negative effects of a system that seems to be failing it&#x27;s purpose.  It&#x27;s important to understand the system as a whole, and it&#x27;s history. Has the patent system ever functioned for the purpose it was designed for?  If it isn&#x27;t functioning correctly now, is that in part or in whole?  Is it not functioning because it has been changed, because the world has changed, or both.<p>Finally, is there a way to alter the system, whether that be to curtail it, expand it, or just change how it operates, that might yield a better functioning system?<p>Personally, I&#x27;m not for abolishing patents.  They had a very clearly defined purpose (innovation encouragement) when they were first created.  I think they&#x27;ve been mostly perverted into another purpose (wealth protection), more-so in some industries than others.  They&#x27;ve been expanded from court rulings to cover things which were not originally thought patentable.  What we need here is a well reasoned legislative overhaul.  What we&#x27;ll get if we&#x27;re extremely lucky is a hole-ridden clusterfuck of revisions, but if we&#x27;re lucky, it will somewhat address the current problems.  The new problems will be something we discover and address tomorrow.