Here are a couple more cross-posts (on Hard-to Define Events and Scientific Innovation, respectively) from my micro-blog, Tumbld Thoughts.
A. Take a look at the link  to a slideshow I am presenting in the near future as a follow-up to the Hard-to-define Events workshop I organized last summer. It is called "If your results are unpredictable, does it make them any less true?", and focuses on applying the hard-to-define events paradigm to biology and the development of scientific theory.
B. And here is an article from Joe Nocera of the NYT called "Innovation Nation at War" . It is a critical assessment of the current patent system and how it is hurting the innovation economy. Specifically, he discusses patents in terms of their economic utility, and how companies buy patent portfolios and file patent lawsuits  in a manner that severely violates this principle. Perhaps a better solution would be a bond system ties to ideas futures, which would provide a more immediate payoff with less legal jujitsu .
C. As an added bonus, here is a podcast (courtesy of the NanoNerds YouTube channel) with Brian Bergstein from MIT Technology Review on the top ten emerging technologies of 2012. The continued development of cheap nanopore DNA sequencing technology is my favorite.
 Figshare, doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.157087.
 here is a real-time update of the "Tweetscape" for this article. Interesting comments.
 The martial arts is figurative, but the legal maneuvering is quite real (see here for an example on the anti-commons). See diagrams above for more information. These are some ideas I have been developing, and stand in comparison to intellectual property-oriented patents.