I don't find it helpful to mix in copyright/intellectual property into this discussion as there is no reason why you can't support these while not supporting the patenting of ideas.
Personally I don't regard two-step authentication, or software patents in general as a kind of "invention", and don't find they should be patentable, much like "prime numbers" or "the periodic table".
I'd be interested in the reasoning you would support copyright but not patents? Copyright and patents have the exact same justification, just one is for published works and the other for "inventions." Both copyright and patents are titles of ownership to information.
I support patents, just not software patents. You can spend billions developing a new drug, and companies need to get reimbursed somehow for that, or everybody loses.
How much you think was been spent "inventing" two-factor authentication?
Can you give an example of software that you'd argue wouldn't have been developed if there were no software patents?
