The problem is that the patents modern trolls abuse are garbage patents that don't promote innovation. Some are overbroad or obvious. Most are directed to math and computer software, a field totally incompatible with the patent system. Over 90% of programmers with an opinion prefer only copyright and trademarks to apply to computer software.
The patent lawyers were thirsty to bleed software companies dry and pushed their system where it isn't wanted and now we have to suffer the consequences of having little influence in Washington to defend ourselves.
Actually, no, only 15% of programmers think that way. Source: same as yours, only I look beyond any particular echo chamber :-)
Or you could negate that premise?
This would nullify one of the original purposes of the patent: to protect "the little guy" who had his idea stolen. If you come up with a great idea, start to market it, then immediately get it ripped off by a huge corporation that then is only ever on the hook for the tiny amount you managed to make before they stole it, then the "protection" evaporates.
Of course, I don't believe patents should really exist at all (I think there are much better models of protection that don't involve such a clearly exploitable mechanism), but just want to show any time you talk about "fixing" the patent system while still keeping it, most good intentioned solutions quickly end up being more complex than initially thought.
http://www.intellectualventures.com/news/press-releases/dash...
http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20110801006668/en/Dash...