Software Patents: Growing Jefferson in a Lab

Paul Kedrosky and Brad Feld have an editorial out on abolishing software patents. I agree that most of the patents granted today should not be granted including most software patents. Innovation and invention and their relationship between business and growth have become a lot more complicated in the last 200 years and the system has grown into an abusive system of blackmail and counter suite. For example, should you be able to patent a discovery of the relationship between susceptibility to a disease and a gene? Isn't that like discovering the Sun and trying to get a patent on that? i.e. Patenting nature?

Perhaps some sort of middle ground is necessary such as a pre-established % of revenue for a period of time to encourage innovation, rather than a patent. A revenue stream sufficient to encourage scientific innovation and reward without such levels of control and brinkmanship that society does not garner the full benefit of the innovation.

I wholeheartedly agree most software patents are nonsense however and serve neither society, innovation or business.

Given the complications here, is it natural to suggest that the Supreme Court make law here? Should this not be within the realm of are ever capable and cogent Congress to adapt patent law to modern types of innovation and invention? Or do we need to clone Jefferson, grow him in a lab until he can make a new law for us?

Brad and Paul's Op-ed here, and Brad's post here.