I'm curious to know what gives you confidence that it will be over soon?

Partially in jest, once/if Chinese companies start to hold more patents than American companies (as in "value", not numbers) you will see the US attitude versus patents to be different.

You may be correct regarding American response. I'd suggest that alongside that, what we're likely to see is the Chinese government significantly tightening up on IP-rights enforcement because it would then be to their advantage to do so. So a nett result of greater IP-rights enforcement globally rather than the original optimistic/hopeful "it will be over soon" assessment.

Thats quite optimistic.

I'd say that if they steal from the Chinese, they won't talk about it much (or say it was the other way around) and continue just the way it was in case they come up with something patentable again.

Did the British attitude to patents change when German companies started owning more patents than British companies?

Yes. For example the British arranged to cancel all German patents after ww2. This led to eg the development of the Japanese camera industry among many other things.

I fail to see the parallels between Germany after World War II and China in 2019. China's patent situation is much closer to Germany in the late 19th century and the British didn't throw away their patent system in the 19th century just because Germany patented more.

Yes, when those patents started pointing guns at British interests :)

Not a patent example, but there's a reason "asprin" is a generic term in the US.

There is nothing in the nature of the universe that's contrary to trade agreements among people, of which patents are one example. You could say that some agreements are unenforceable under current conditions or perhaps undesirable or even silly, but unless people agree to violate the laws of physics, the universe is agnostic to human contracts. As I wrote in another comment, patents do not protect some truth -- actually, their entire purpose was to help spread truths -- just applications (and human ones, not natural ones).

contrary to the nature of the universe? That seems a few levels lower than merely unworkable, I mean a penny falling slower than a bowling ball is contrary to the nature of the universe, I don't think patents contravene anything as primary as gravity.

You can't patent math theorems because they are not considered inventions, but rather discovering a logical laws of the universe. I treat algorithms in a similar manner.

Hyperbole | /hʌɪˈpəːbəli/ | noun

Exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally.

— The Oxford Dictionary

The current IP system is pretty decent.... Just all time limits should be adjusted to 1 year.

If I invent something, a 1 year headstart in the market should be plenty of reward.

Seems short, especially for low-yield ip like music. 10-20 is probably good

They are talking about patents here. It has nothing to do with copyright which concerns music and which is perfectly alright.

It certainly does not help that they use the ambiguous term IP that does not really mean anything.

If copyright only lasted a year, you can bet the industry would move to much shorter release cycles and still capture most of the value.

Actually research would move in the direction of things whose value can be captured within a year. The patent system shapes the IP industry as whole.

> It will be over soon

The universe or the patent system?