This is another great point you made. It shows we have problems in our system that still need fixing (and antitrust remedies of the past fell short).

In particular, closed source software promote software monopolies very much because of the difficulties in interfacing well with a larger opponent who controls their side of the interface. Software is very complex. We aren't talking about screws and bolts.. except in that interoperability is key to fair competition and low prices.

Unfortunately, patents won't solve Microsoft's (and others') monopoly abuses when we allow Microsoft (and other monopolists) to likewise take out patents. Why would we give monopolists access to more monopolies?

Software patents stifle and hurt society and individual freedoms significantly; however, I would accept a patent system that gives out tens of thousands of long-duration monopoly subsidies *exclusively* to the little people and solely usable against the largest of players. [Note that in this system, if you aren't that large, you don't suffer much direct harm but neither gain any benefits.]

And how about the many poor inventors with thousands of great ideas who cannot afford to take out any or very many patents (especially if they prefer to code software rather than write up patents and litigate or who see the whole patent system as backwards)? Their ideas are leveraged by the wealthier groups taking out the patents and then used against them and against everyone else.

Aren't copyrights $0 and automatic? Why are we discriminating against the majority of inventors? Software, being so low cost to produce successfully (particularly because of Internet collaboration) means there are many inventors being spit upon by the system.