Mutual Assured Destruction is the strategy that you just outlined for the OIN. The total disarmament strategy would correspond to PJ's oft-stated notion that software and patents need to get a divorce.

The other way is to start a war. Simply begin to challenge specific software patents, absent any suits being brought to trigger the review. None of the major players can afford to do this, (see MAD, supra) but a guerrilla tactic from a loose-knit community might work. I think that was the OP's concept.

Of course, if the various PTOs were doing their job properly, stupid and obvious patents would never be granted. It has previously been pointed out that the USPTO, at least, has absolutely no financial incentive to reject patent applications, but rather the reverse.

---
(c) assigned to PJ

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

• Not Economically Viable - Authored by: sproggit on Monday, May 21 2012 @ 01:42 AM EDT
  • Not Economically Viable - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 21 2012 @ 04:52 AM EDT
• MAD or disarmament - Authored by: Wol on Monday, May 21 2012 @ 04:27 PM EDT