If he&#x27;s right about innovation part, most of the innovation in the mobile space should come from patent-loving groups instead of companies selling phones, companies selling apps, academics, or FOSS volunteers. Currently, most innovation is from non-patent side.<p>If he&#x27;s right about motivation, we should see all kinds of innovation in the mobile space with goal of licensing or selling resulting patents. That group is such a small percentage of overall activity in that sector so as to be nearly non-existent.<p>So, we have motivation for innovation (i.e. sell stuff) plus tons of innovators without people relying on patents or filing lots of them. The patent system isn&#x27;t helping here. However, suits like Apple vs Samsung, Oracle vs Google, and so on show patent holders do use it to try to eliminate competition and ensure stagnation for profits. So, we have no provable need for patent system for innovation, proof that innovation happens anyway, and proof patents are used to remove competition in a way that harms consumers. Whether fully or not, his model of patent system = innovation boost is tested enough to reject it for mobile software. Similar arguments apply to software in general.