Why is it "Rapist" and not "Raper"

These explaations make sense if we’re talking about the words grant, issue, or apply, but not with patent.

The doer does to the doee.

The granter grants to the grantee.

The issuer issues to the issuee.

In all these cases, the Patent and Trademark Office is correctly described as the granter or the issuer –

The P.T.O. grants a patent to the inventor.
The P.T.O. issues a patent to the inventor.

However, it does not work with the verb “to patent.” It is the inventor that does the patenting.

WRONG: The P.T.O. patents an invention.
RIGHT: The inventor patents an invention.

Thus, in the case of a patent, the inventor is the actor and should logically be the patenter rather than the patentee.

Well, “serial killer” is used to distinguish this type of perpetrator from a mass murderist, both of whom have multiple victims. I’ve always thought “serial rapist” to be a bit silly, since those who commit multiple rapes are rarely “mass rapists.”

I should think that “mass rapist,” in analogy with “mass murderer,” would be one who rapes a lot of people all at once. The term would be rare, I think, because of the physiological limitations on such a feat.

“Serial rapist,” like “serial killer” would be someone who attacks many people, but one at a time.

There have always been"serial rapists" (indeed most serial killers are also serial rapists), but it’s only within the past 10 years the term has been used.

“Spree killers” are those who go on a shooting spree, killing many individuals over a few weeks (i.e. the DC/Virgina area Killers in 2003). I image “spree rapists” exist, but I’ve never seen that term used.