So who wins? Large corporations of course. While I have no problem with companies being of any size, nor do I have any problem with any company being aggressive in their expansion and marketing of their product lines. Corporations of any size exist because they fill a consumer need or desire, and as such are a 'good thing'. So, I don't blame corporations for asking for these protections, nor do I blame anyone for taking advantage of protections afforded to them. The problem I have is with the protections being granted.
So who loses? You do. As a member of the human race you will see innovations stifled...or more specifically you won't see certain innovations.
Large companies are filing patents at a tremendous rate. A patent costs in the order of $10,000 - as a private inventor, how many can you afford to file? For multi-billion dollar companies, this cost doesn't even register on the PnL sheet.

So what? At some point we will reach a critical balance, and I suggest it's not far off. At some point regular inventors will quit inventing in their garage. Why? Because they can't afford the lawyers. The North American legal systems protect only those that can afford legal fees. Predatory lawsuits are common, so if your new invention remotely looks like something already patented they will come and try to bully you into giving it to them. Forget it if your invention actually uses or expands on patented ideas, regardless of whether or not the owner is currently making use of the patent.
The end result is that only large corporations can generate innovations. Clearly this will have a stiffling effect on innovation. First and foremost, this decreases the pool of inventors, which will have the net effect of decreasing the number of innovations. However, even if you disagree with that, and suggest that corporations will be creative enough to generate every possible innovation, we are still left with less choice and less innovation.
Take as an example, company XYZ, who owns two competing products/patents for some 'problem' or consumer need. They will obviously choose to retail the one that is more beneficial to them, not the consumer. Since they own the rights to both, no one can sell the other option, even if they think of it independently - the consumer has just lost choice.