"To a further extreme you could argue to take money from the wealthy to pay the medical bills of the needy."
That's hardly an extreme - it's what happens in many advanced nations with universal healthcare. Taxes are collected, and part of them go to paying for medical treatment for everyone, rich or poor.
"property and rights are principles the United States is built upon."
That doesn't say anything about how long the temporary monopolies granted for patents and copyrights should last, or whether everything in every context should be patentable (e.g. software and UI design).
Intellectual property rights are important, insofar as they "promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts". When this goal is no longer being effectively promoted by the current implementation of the patent/copyright systems, then it's time to consider re-engineering them.
The last point you mentioned is the next logical step in the discussion I believe. As things stand, it would appear the company holding the patents is in the right, from a legal perspective, and that sucks for the little girl. However, were now at the juncture to call in to question the limits and extents of the Patent Clause created to "promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts." On which side of the fence does this scenario fall on. Not such an easy question to answer. In what way do patents "promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts" anyways?
You make valid points, but make them at the wrong point in the discussion from the point of view of many people here. By seeing many, many examples of this sort, and by our own experiences in the industry, we've already discovered that software patents, in general, hinder 'the Progress of Science and useful Arts'. What you call 'the next logical step in the discussion' is a step we've taken a long time ago.
But, apparently, others who don't share our experience, have not. What would be the best way to explain the situation? Writing comments on hacker news is probably not going to influence any lawmakers....
That's hardly an extreme - it's what happens in many advanced nations with universal healthcare. Taxes are collected, and part of them go to paying for medical treatment for everyone, rich or poor.
"property and rights are principles the United States is built upon."
That doesn't say anything about how long the temporary monopolies granted for patents and copyrights should last, or whether everything in every context should be patentable (e.g. software and UI design).
Intellectual property rights are important, insofar as they "promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts". When this goal is no longer being effectively promoted by the current implementation of the patent/copyright systems, then it's time to consider re-engineering them.