> But you can't use them for what they are actually intended for?
Patents aren't intended for racket and stifling innovation.
> A patent holder doesn't "use patents for encouraging innovation"
Oh, really? Then take a look at the patent law again, and the reason why limited time monopoly is given (as patents). If using a patent prevents and slows down innovation, it goes against the reason it was given in the first place and is usually a good indicator of patent trolling / aggression and otherwise abuse of the patent system, as well as indicator that patent system is broken (or not well tuned).
I.e. normally patents shouldn't exist (monopoly is normally bad). But, they are granted to boost innovation. If results of patents usage is the opposite - something is wrong.
Patents aren't intended for racket and stifling innovation.
> A patent holder doesn't "use patents for encouraging innovation"
Oh, really? Then take a look at the patent law again, and the reason why limited time monopoly is given (as patents). If using a patent prevents and slows down innovation, it goes against the reason it was given in the first place and is usually a good indicator of patent trolling / aggression and otherwise abuse of the patent system, as well as indicator that patent system is broken (or not well tuned).
I.e. normally patents shouldn't exist (monopoly is normally bad). But, they are granted to boost innovation. If results of patents usage is the opposite - something is wrong.