Well with some tech companies (you know who) starts off by abusing "non-essential patents" and use it as leverage to force competitors to exit the market or to pay a hefty fee as a "tax" while essentially doing nothing, all other tech companies have no choice but to start protecting themselves by pre-emptively getting their own "non-essential patents". Current USA decision to treat "non-essential patents" as more valuable than "essential patents", is unfair, especially when it creates a situation that a patent on a shape is more valuable than an algorithm to accurately convert wireless signal to data. I wouldn't even want to mention "non-essential patents" should be eliminated as this is going to be adversely affect such you-know-who company and USA government will never allow it. So at the very least, "non-essential patents" should have been subjected to the same treatment as "essential patents". So say, if a company A want to trade an "essential patent" with company B for a "non-essential patent", company B cannot say no to it because "non-essential patent" must also be licensed for always equal and reasonable fee, instead of the special treatment it has now that it is completely up to company B to demand any fee they want.