The reason wing warping isn't used much has little to do with the Wright's patent. While many pre-WWI aircraft used wing warping (such as the Etrich Taube [1]), as airspeeds increased, smaller control surfaces became adequate, and the lower strength of warpable wings doomed them to obsolescence. The F-22 Raptor [2], a modern highly-maneuverable aircraft, has control surfaces all over its wings, giving it all the advantages of wing warping without the disadvantage of reduced wing strength.

[0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Pearse [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etrich_Taube [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F22_Raptor

Since then, engineers have been trying to find more elaborate ways of regaining lowspeed flight maneuverability by adding more control surfaces. Flaps, for example extend the wing to increase the chamber. It might not be warping in the traditional context but they have definitely warped the airflow to the same effect.

Canards come to mind right off the bat. The fact is that the design of aircraft is extremely expensive and there is little advantage to innovation. You aren't going to be able to charge twice as much as your competitor with the 737 lookalike regardless of how wonderful your new canard layout flexible control surface design is.

Even military aircraft aren't pushing the envelope in design features anymore - think of how similar an F-22 is to an F-15. There is simply too much risk and not enough payoff.

Even military aircraft aren't pushing the envelope in design features anymore

Ever seen the JAS39 Gripen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gripen)?

For that specific example however I was thinking civilian aircraft, in which canards would be a huge step forward but are never seen.