If the patents can't be worked around reasonably then it could just as easily mean that the patents are so broad and superficial that nearly any approach, whether common sense or not, would violate them. I haven't read the full patents, so I don't have a real opinion yet, but from what I know about software patents in general my explanation would surprise me less than yours.
Yes, you are absolutely correct, I was only making a statement from one angle.
It's too late now, but if I could edit my statement, I would like to point out that the patent could be valid assuming it was very SPECIFIC in its claims, and not just a broad patent which would mean that the single unique invention was so brilliant that it was the one and true path to the end product.
