Working Around Patents with Evolutionary Design

An anonymous reader writes "Using computational trial-and-error allowed a Stanford team to come up with a patent-free WiFi antenna. Patent rules are tricky to formulate as self-interest dictates that the claim is as general as possible. Patent fences effectively can build a substantive competitive barrier to markets. Using evolutionary tactics may be a way to legally and ethically bypass these roadblocks."

Re:and then....

[kailoran]

Better yet, what if someone patents all "evolutionary-designed $DEVICE" (antennas, cables, whatever), making any further attempts to evolve a different version a violation?

So what's to prevent patent trolls doing the same?

[tomhudson]

Its time to "fix" this problem by removing software and business methods from the purview of the patent office.

"Evolutionary tactics..." nonsense.

[Anonymous Coward]

Hardly "evolutionary", designing a system that designs trial and error is hardly "evolutonary", its basically an intelligent search of a search space compared against a pattern. Evolution is blind, it has no end goal.

Re:That's great!

[riegel]

I am not a big fan of the patent system. but...

This example shows the patent system working to the end it was designed (encourageing innovation). If Cisco had not had a patent on design A design B may have never surfaced.

Am I wrong?