People file patents, not companies. The people then assign ownership to the company. Erik Arvidsson's blog clearly shows he works at Google and while Andrew Palay does not have a blog his $4600 donation to the Obama campaign reveals that he also works at Google.
Yes, as patent trollling is a good way to do that.
How is when Amazon tries to patent single click checkout, that is evil, but when your favorite company does the a frivolous patent, that is just protecting their ass?
I guess a lot of developers believe that software patents such as these don't pass the "non-obvious" test, and therefore filing one is seen as wrong. I know that when I read some software patents (I haven't read this one, so not sure about this case), I think that if I had the same problem, I could solve it without too much trouble. Does this make the patent obvious? We have copyright law to protect the implementation - shouldn't that be enough. We're often told that idea's are worth less (worthless?), it's how they're executed. But this puts the power (and the money) in the hands of someone who had an idea and a general specification on how to implement it.
