Re: Excerpt from the Annual Meeting of Evil (Self-Described) Geniuses
At the very least, patent process should change to only protect non-obvious inventions that require directed effort to come up with them. The only social benefit of patents is providing an incentive to do research in new inventions, but for inventions that do not require such investments it's just a bonus for smart people, but has no benefit to anyone else.
You should be required to file for a patent *before* developing your invention.
That filing needs to state what problem your invention intends to solve.
For one year, you don't get any patent or protection. If someone comes up with your idea based on your description of the problem, the idea was obvious and shouldn't be protected. No one gets a patent on your idea. If someone comes up with a different solution, you are still on the run for a patent but only for your solution.
If after one year no one has come up with a solution that matches yours, you file for a patent under the cover of your previous filing, and if granted you get protection for your job-obvious idea.
This process provides the same level or protection granted by patents today but only for inventions that are not obvious (which is something required by patents today but that not enforced since it's impossible for patent clerks to be specialists in a million complex fields as needed to assess obviousness), and that require effort to develop (and not something that comes up spontaneously and that would be produced whether you expect to profit from it or not).