So, my question is: given all the controversy in the (tech) media over patents lately, how is the patent office able to rationalize granting (what appears to me to be) a very bad patent?
There is no rational thinking at all going on at the patent office. They reject your initial application a few times to make sure you're good and rich and then grant it figuring the courts will work it out.
USPTO: "The mission of the patent business area is to help our customers get patents; its performance goal is to grant patents to inventors for their discoveries. "
I think it is significant that the mission is not "to promote the progress of science and the useful arts by [whatever]" It is simply to "help our customers get patents."
To be fair, the 2011 annual report says the mission is:
"Fostering innovation, competitiveness and economic growth, domestically and abroad to deliver high quality and timely examination of patent and trademark applications, guiding domestic and international intellectual property policy, and delivering intellectual property information and education worldwide, with a highly skilled, diverse workforce."
http://www.uspto.gov/about/stratplan/ar/2011/mda_01.html
the patent office doesn't give a fuck. as long as you pay the filing fee and fill out all the right checkboxes in the right color ink, the mindless drone in the cubicle will rubber-stamp it.
