Case after case we continue to see a pattern of apparent ignorance, incompetence or indifference on the part of the patent office.<p>I read through the claims. This patent should not have been granted. You can go back to the 1980's and find relevant prior art.<p>Are they playing "dumb" because of self preservation? In other words, if the patent office became really strict and only a handful of patents were granted every year they'd only need a fraction of the people, infrastructure and organization now in place. People would lose their jobs.<p>And so, if you want to keep your job, you issue patents like we are in the middle of a new scientific renaissance. More patents means more money being pumped into the system which, in turn, means you get to keep your job, your benefits and an amazing lifetime pension you did not pay for. You know you the patents you are letting through are crap but all you care about is your financial well being. You htink "Let the courts and those rich fucks sort it out" and move on.<p>Is it possible that the feedback loop at the patent office is such that volume, rather than quality, is what's remunerated? Never mind that this destroys innovation and causes huge financial losses across all kinds of businesses.<p>The fitness function might be such that optimization delivers exactly what we do not want as a nation but what the patent office, as an isolated organism, needs for survival.