> Perhaps that progress won't happen at the rate you'd prefer, but it's significantly better than burning the whole thing to the ground.

Changing patent length (pc's suggestion) is hardly seems like burning the whole thing to the ground.

In the US, if I understand correctly, there are ways to defend against patent abuse, though it typically involves costly legal fees. Fees many cannot justify in spending.

Addressing patent challenges may be a way to protect innovators, both those who should gain reward for their innovations, and those who seek to grain reward by building upon innovations.