so that's the viewpoint in which patents may be "the antithesis to innovation". i won't argue which one's correct, just providing it here since you requested.
Software arguably is not suited for a patent system, but patents have worked well for centuries.
This is exactly the claim I'm taking issue with. The OP implied that the legal definition of innovation was "patents filed" and implied that this is somehow meaningful, and I'm saying that the absence of patents is not evidence of a lack of innovation.