The Peer-to-Patent Project, an effort by the USPTO, academic institutions and commercial industry players, aims to connect the technological community with the patenting process. With the project, the public can submit prior art and commentary on pending patent applications, and help shape future innovation.

While it would appear that all parties concerned with innovation would benefit from and cheer on the Peer-to-Patent Project, that’s not the case. Linux World has an interesting note from a fellow who realized that a peer-review examination process that does not kill a patent makes it stronger.

Instead of facing bandits armed with patents likely to be bad, we'll be facing bandits (patent holders) who are confident in their weapons (patents). If you think the problem of mostly-bad software patents is bad today, try peer-reviewed patents that are more likely to go off (be enforced in court).
...
I'm not saying that we shouldn't try to find prior art, but why share information with the trolls? Sun Tzu said, "He who knows when he can fight and when he cannot will be victorious." I say "He who tells someone else when he can fight and when he cannot will be...um...losetorious."
…
If you have Prior Art, print it out and put it in your safe deposit box. Make sure that the source is verifiable, but don't tell anyone what the source is.

In some ways, the Peer-to-Patent Project is not entirely different from “patent busting” efforts, such as those by EFF and various amateur patent agents in the FOSS community. There is scrutiny of patent claims, comparison of those claims to existing knowledge and prior art, and a purported desire to improve the quality of technological patents. However, if the FOSS movement does not like the Peer-to-Patent Project, but supports the patent busting efforts of relatively anti-patent FOSS affiliated parties, one must question whether those parties really want to improve the patent system or simply take it apart.