US patent and EU patent law

There has been lots of lawsuits based on patent conflicts. Recent one being z4 on MS and AutoDesk.

http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/software/story/0,10801,110690,00.html

The other rediculous one being, Netflix sueing Blockbuster. Reason: blockbuster copied its business model which is online renting. (but they have not patented that business model) But still by the US patent law, one can patent a business model. Patent basically means the right to monopolize an invention.

As far as I am concerned, these are not real inventions. These are just a sub set of some already implemented/invented process. For instance, online renting business model is not an invention atall but on the other hand concept of RENTING is an invention.

But the European law goes far beyond and invalidates most of the "inventions" considered worthy in US patent law. According to Europeans, mathematical methods, intellectual methods, business methods, computer programs, presentation of information etc are not inventions in the sense of patent law. It seems resonable to me. Most of those mentioned above are just a means to acheive an already invented process. The Europen law also gives a nice explanation for not including patents on softwares:

Programming is similar to writing symphonies. When a programmer writes software, he weaves together thousands of ideas (algorithms or calculation rules) into a copyrighted work. Usually some of the ideas in the programmer's work will be new and non-obvious according to the standards of the patent system. When many such ideas are patented, it becomes impossible to write software without infringing on patents. Software authors are in effect deprived of their copyright assets; they live under permanent threat of being blackmailed by holders of large patent portfolios. As a result, less software is written and fewer new ideas appear.



Moreover, should'n there be one universal patent law?