In a first-to-invent regime, the law still favors one with a patent,
since it gives one a cross-licensing opportunity to settle a dispute
with a similar, infringed patent, even if one uses their patent only
protectively.
In a first-to-file regime, protective patents are absolutely necessary.
I checked with Dan Ravicher. The proposed law would have no effect on
criteria for prior art, so it doesn't make patents for defense either
more or less "necessary" than they currently are.
However, I agree with your main point, that there is no reason to
reject a standard because of a patent, given a suitable royalty-free
blanket license for using the patent.
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf