IP-based startups (and their lawyers) defending IP laws is similar to big agriculture (and their lobbyists) defending farm subsidies. Yes, they will be affected by the change, but if they don't even bother to try and make an argument as to why society would be worse off under a different system then why would you listen to them?
Though personally once you've used the phrase "Intellectual Property" the game is already over. The various things people lump under that heading are so broad and disparate that you might as well just say "laws need changing" and counter with "we need laws". That's not even getting into the fact that you're implicitly accepting that you're talking about a form of property, rather than government regulation and monopoly grants.
I assume you include every manufacturer of goods that has a patent as "IP-based startups"as well? Patents are IP. Just because you don't like Angry Birds or some other app maker getting rich doesn't mean IP is bad.
Could it use reform? Heck yeah. But your view is no better than the supposed lawyers you hate against.
Though personally once you've used the phrase "Intellectual Property" the game is already over. The various things people lump under that heading are so broad and disparate that you might as well just say "laws need changing" and counter with "we need laws". That's not even getting into the fact that you're implicitly accepting that you're talking about a form of property, rather than government regulation and monopoly grants.