Apple defined the landscape that all Android phones now inhabit.

Your view doesn't make sense to me. If you buy a nice car by working hard, should I be allowed to take it from you after you have had 'enough' time to drive it?

Patents should be granted only on IP that would otherwise risk being locked up indefinitely as a trade secret. Otherwise, they aren't promoting the "progress of Science and the useful Arts" but instead feathering the nests of incumbent producers at consumers' expense.

The patents being lobbed about like grenades don't fall into that category, IMO. No one would ever need to read a patent to see how to implement "slide to unlock."

Apple built a product that was innovative but clearly derivative of what Motorola had been selling for decades, why shouldn't Motorola defend itself in the market it created?

They can. So long as they don't try and license their FRAND patents using non-FRAND terms.

FRAND does not mean that everyone pays the same absolute amount.

It does mean that they are Fair and Reasonable. 2.25% of the total sale value is neither.

This is a terrible analogy. If you take my car, now you have one car, and I have none. That's a zero-sum game.

The smartphone market is not zero-sum. There is plenty of room for multiple similar products.