Not sure exactly what I said but I obviously touched a nerve. I said absolutely NOTHING or made NO assertion about patents being proved or defined on the internet either by direct words or by implication. Don't let your imagination run wild on you. My anecdotes are simply there to say there are pluses and minus for those willing to choose to patent their products.

My comment about the "naiviety of the inventor should get the spoils" refers to the fact that a patent system is only partially effective especially in the current world wide trade. In a perfect world, where everyone respects another's rights and obeys every law on the planet is nice but it simply doesn't exist -- hence my use of the word naive.

Quite often a invention is copied in part or nearly in whole in another country outside the US where it would be very expensive to try to reach out and defend their patent from a foreign interest. In some Asian countries, for example, 90% or better of all software is pirated and/or reverse engineered or directly copied with no compensation given to the originators. These software companies sometimes do go after the cheaters but it can be expensive and often impractical with the differences in culture, language and laws.

Patent protection is only as good as those who will respect it kind of like a locked door keeps out only the honest people. And there are fewer and fewer honest people out there. A lot of people/companies will push and exceed the boundaries of law regardless of whatever patent protection is in place.

I would agree that because of a patent system protecting the rights of the inventor is a great incentive for innovation but to assert that research would not exist without it is a bit strong. Inventions and new ideas are quite often born out of a perceived need for something different or better and are only brought to market because of a perceived financial benefit to the inventor. Sooner or later someone else is going to get a brainstorm and build upon previous inventions. If and when that invention relies too much prior ideas, we have a legal system(s) in place to have it debated and adjudicated.