USPTO has in my opinion has become a laughing stock both in issuing patents for such obvious and innocuous things that they are actually stifling innovation rather than actually encouraging it. I have worked in several high tech companies in the telecommunications/internet area and we have a "File a Patent Week" where every employee is required to peruse through their work for a given period and identify things that can be patented. And we were rewarded just for filing patent applications, no matter how absurd the application was. And to our surprise, some of those patents were even approved. So currently, all companies (particularly tech) do is to patent every single method, its variation, its variation's variation to do something.

We need serious set of reforms for USPTO and here's what I'd like to see happen:

1. If a inventor does not intend to use a patent after X number of years, patent expires and it becomes part of public domain. I personally think X should be 10 years for technology patents.
2. There needs to be a "open and transparent" patent examination process involving the public at large, just like change.gov when evaluating patents for "prior art". This will largely reduce the patent trolls. USPTO has a large backlog and cannot hire enough patent examiner to examine incoming patent applications fast enough. But an open examination/evaluation by the public would solve that problem.
3. The requirements for an inventor to show that their invention does not have a prior art should become more stricter and elaborate. A few diagrams would not and should not suffice.
4. There needs to be requirements for the patent holder to report back to USPTO about how the patent has been issued (Patent Status Report) probably submitted via an online form so as to know if it is actually being applied or is it simply being used for indemnification against patent infringement.

Innovation/Invention is one of the few last remaining original "american values" that still has some value in the rest of the world. Let's do something to keep it that way.

I think the largest obstacle to Broadband adoption and general wireless/internet industry innovation is lack of competition which is a consequence of monopolism that's rampant. Let me explain what I mean.

I live in a fairly sub-urban neighborhood where my options to get broadband internet are a) Cable (Comcast) b) DSL (Verizon, AT&T) and c) Satellite (Dish, DirecTV). And a basic broadband internet service costs about $45 per month - $540 per year. And, the most important fact is that the cost hasn't gone down in the last 5 years I have been living here. Infact my monthly internet costs have actually gone up - Comcast finds innovative ways to "generate" revenue - by charging additional fees for "premium" features like "SpeedBoost" etc, whereas the broadband costs have gone down considerably for the rest of the developed world.

My point is that if there was "real" competition, if more than one cable company was allowed to service an area, there would be competition which would benefit consumers like me who would be able to shop for services from various companies.

I'd like to see some progress in this area in an Obama administration -- abandoning the practice of monopolism in offering Broadband services, encouraging competition and hence as a consequence encouraging innovation all the time benefiting the consumers and increasing the adoption rate.