Earlier quoted context omitted.
That and a 2 year window would mean that companies would have to file in such a way that their patent is granted right before they go to market. If the patent gets filed a year before they go to market, their market time is halved.
Isn't that far worse for innovation? In this case we would have the original iPhone shipping in 2012 instead of 2007.
I was ignoring all the paperwork stuff before the device goes to market, so this two years is from product launch. Maybe that's a little bit short.
Another idea is to only allow patent protections for active products. Thus, if you're making and selling a widget you can use patents; but if you made and tried to sell a widget, and failed, you cannot sit on the patent for years and extract money from anyone who comes after you who is selling a different widget that happens to infringe a patent you own.
I don't know - I recognise the need to protect the hard work that people do, and to give them incentives to innovate, and to reward them for releasing those innovations to the public, but the current system is now thoroughly broken.
I also recognise there's considerable bias in the reporting. Maybe there are some small inventors who use patents for what they're meant for.