> I think an argument that evidence of independent invention should create a presumption that an invention is obvious would be far better received as well as being more consistent with the statutory framework.
This seems plausible on its face, but in fact there have been lots of cases where really inventive things were conceived at nearly the same time by different inventors.
If multiple inventors independently create something, none of them should be able to take that creation from the others just by being first to the patent office. I regard the old story about Bell winning patent rights to the telephone by a narrow margin as a failure of the system.
This seems plausible on its face, but in fact there have been lots of cases where really inventive things were conceived at nearly the same time by different inventors.