The big boys have portfolios of patents that they fling at each other until some sort of cross-licensing deal is reached, whilst smaller players just have to cross their fingers and hope that nobody decides to tax them too extravagantly.
I omit the possibility of creating non-infringing products simply because it's virtually impossible to bring any meaningful product to market without infringing on somebody's overly broad patent.
That's like saying, "We can't stop fighting this war, then all our guns would be worthless."
Now if patents were only used defensively (which they're obviously not in this case, since Apple went on the attack) the analogy would then be banning ballistic missiles right after acquiring a ballistic missile defense system, which would be easier to swallow.
Patents are being used aggressively because that's the nature of competition—if anyone is going to use them that way, everyone has to. But it could be in everyone's interest if that option were removed from the table, regardless how much each had previously spent amassing an arsenal simply to remain competitive.
Wait, in the news today: "Google Looks to InterDigital to Strengthen Patent Portfolio". So like everybody else they are buying even more ammo for the gun they keep in the nightstand drawer.