Another practical example that relates to digital music: The patent for zero-latency convolution reverb is held by a company (I forget which one) that effectively has eliminated any possibility of seeing a free/cheapware zero latency convolution reverb while that patent is in existence. I think that patent is a pain for music software development, and not worth protecting even though that software method is pretty damn non-obvious. Now take these complications, and add it to something a bit more common like synthesis techniques. Pretty soon we might see Synthedit “developers” breaking so-called “protected ideas”. But one has to consider if a technique can be reproduced in something that’s as simple as Synthedit, a program that existed BEFORE the patent was filed, by someone with only a moderate amount of mathematical knowledge, then the idea must be pretty damn obvious.

Try convincing the USPTO of that though. If they can’t figure out obvious patents in regards to something as common as “text-messaging” or “internet applications” etc. then they have ZERO chance of understanding something as esoteric as synthesis methods. They’ll just rubber-stamp that bad boy and leave it to us to handle the consequences of their broken system.

ATA

Not to mention the ridiculous cost of filing a patent precluding the general public from filing them at all.

The whole system’s a total sham.