I'm planning to attempt patent for a software product that performs a very large range of operations, and there is nothing like it out there. However, I'm sure that out of the giant sea of patents on just about every simple web-operation task out there, a few patents will cover some of the functionality of what my product does on a larger scale in a very new and useful way.
How can I judge whether or not my new use or improvement of various patented software technologies will constitute a new patent?
For example, Google was sued for Drive, on account that there is a patent on "technology that allows quick access to a common disk on multiple computers". I would think that Drive certainly would be considered as a "new use" for the very simple technology needed to quickly access a common disk on multiple computers. It seems as if patents like this are too simple and would damage any new progress in the industry of web streaming services for documents and files.
Among many other things, my technology certainly allows quick access to a common disk on multiple computers. That's easy. It's called loading the file into a server and reading / writing any streamed changes. So I'm trying to figure out what exactly is required for part of an invention to be considered new use or improvement.