The fact that we're swimming in low-quality patents is also part of the problem
Another part of the problem is the lack of education about the patent system in the general public. The number of rediculous assertions I've seen which are patently (heh) false is astounding. A recent example was a patent awarded to Amazon; the media reporting would have you think they got a patent for taking a photo of something in front of a white background. While that does form part of the claims, the actual details are extremely narrow, and the patent is almost worthless to Amazon.
Then there's the frequently brought up "Apple got a patent for rounded corners on a phone! The patent system has gone MAD!". This was a design patent, intended to stop others making phones that look like Apple's (both other big players like Samsung and HTC as well as Chinese knockoff manufacturers). Design patents are very different from standard patents; they're closer to copyright for physical things than patents.
These are just examples of the tip of the iceburg of ignorance I see every day when people discuss the patent system.
As for lots of "low-quality patents", I disagree that is actually true. It's just the bad ones that get reported on most frequently and loudly; it's the reason more people are scared of flying even though they have a much higher chance of dying on the car trip to the airport. The USPTO and other patent offices around the world are very good at rejecting things which don't (legally) deserve a patent. Generaly examiners are quite familliar with the state of the art of the technologies they examine and know when something is well known or an obvious improvement over the prior art. Sometimes they have to allow something that seems obvious because they have no legal grounds to reject it.
Then there's the frequently brought up "Apple got a patent for rounded corners on a phone! The patent system has gone MAD!". This was a design patent, intended to stop others making phones that look like Apple's (both other big players like Samsung and HTC as well as Chinese knockoff manufacturers). Design patents are very different from standard patents; they're closer to copyright for physical things than patents.
These are just examples of the tip of the iceburg of ignorance I see every day when people discuss the patent system.
As for lots of "low-quality patents", I disagree that is actually true. It's just the bad ones that get reported on most frequently and loudly; it's the reason more people are scared of flying even though they have a much higher chance of dying on the car trip to the airport. The USPTO and other patent offices around the world are very good at rejecting things which don't (legally) deserve a patent. Generaly examiners are quite familliar with the state of the art of the technologies they examine and know when something is well known or an obvious improvement over the prior art. Sometimes they have to allow something that seems obvious because they have no legal grounds to reject it.