Patents aren't about doing something new. They are non obvious ideas - read the definition please. Amazon 1 click patent was an example of idiodicy of "something new". This blasé attitude to patents is extremely dangerous. It stifles innovation and hurts society - the exact opposite of why patents were created. Imagine if i patented RGB 128, 179, 253 because I couldn't find that value hadn't been used before. Should this be patentable? What about patenting a piece of timber 3.914 ft x 1.234 ft? This is where Apple deserve a really hard kick in the balls. They patented something so generic and obvious that it is almost impossible not to breach it. You've heard the saying "standing on the shoulders of giants" - what it means is that technology has enabled a bunch of potential inventions. Patterns of these combinations emerge naturally - sine pick up on it quicker than others... But such incremental steps should not be patentable because someone else would have easily come up with the same thing. Now if you tell me that someone invented a new DSP, or a new compression algorithm that was genuinely different, then that is a good example. Ask the question: would someone have easily come up with it, roughly at the same time ... And... Does it help of harm society to grant this patent... Then and only then should a patent bd granted. - posted from my iPhone