Or when presented with a problem, one could do a patent search, license the existing technology, and build something even more innovative.

this will work if the tech is sufficiently innovative, and is difficult to implement, and is not at all obvious that such piece of tech is the solution to such a problem.

However, some of the patents i've seen being battled out in court is about the _shape_ of a phone. Rounded corners. Swipe, pinch to zoom, and bounce when reached the end of a list.

These things are not worthy of being patented, and none of them are non-obvious enough to be called innovative. it is at these patents that ruin the system.

Why do you say they're not the same? I would tend to think that they are essentially the same.