« Last post by EvilGeniusSkis on Today at 03:00:02 PM »
The whole pretence that there is some clear difference between ideas and implementations in the context of patents is a ruse to begin with (a prototype is clearly an implementation from an English point of view, but that's never what they mean). Don't get caught up in it, there's no difference. Same as objective tests for obviousness and prior art ... there is no difference there either.
The only way to honestly judge the level of innovation and obviousness in a patent isn't semantic games, it's by asking the subjective opinion of a domain expert (hindsight be damned). No amount of semantic circle jerking will ever change that, which is not to say lawyers will ever find that satisfactory so they'll keep circle jerking. Don't stand in the middle.
I think you may be misusing the term "circle jerk"