What's more, these trivial patents undermine the system in a far more insidious way. Precisely because they are so trivial, they effectively amount to a patent on an idea, rather than on an implementation. You're absolutely right that even credible patents, like the RSA patent, can do great harm. In his book Owning the Future, Seth Shulman points out that the Wright brothers' early patents on aviation held back the development of the industry in this country versus that in Europe, where their patents didn't apply, to such a level that the government had to step in and nationalize the patents. There are certain expensive fields of research that are undertaken only with the hope that there will be some protection for the result.
Software is at the opposite extreme, though.
So I'm not ready to say the patent system as a whole should be overthrown. I am ready to say that anyone who files a patent should think long and hard about the overall business effects of such a patent. In most cases, I'd bet that being restrictive about a patent holds back the market, and so you end up eating more of a smaller pie. That being said, I have always supported the right of true creators of value and ideas to make their own decisions about the best way to profit from their ideas. In so doing, you adopt the view that was rejected in writing the US Constitution.