I did mention that there is a huge attrition rate between patent filing and patent grants for AI, because it sits in this special place. You also have to understand, if we are talking about patent filings in China, that the Chinese government pays researchers to file patents, but those researchers don't get any more money after that first cheque. Those patents all end up on the cutting room floor for the most part. There is a lot of research, including Canadian research, that shows that it's a fraction of one per cent of those patent applications that actually turn into patents outside of China.
I also mentioned that every sector is not the same. Just because you have a patent.... Not all patents are worth the same; they're not like money. I can go get a patent for my shoe, probably, but I'm not going to be able to really enforce that against anyone because shoes have been around for quite some time. That's not a condemnation of the patent process. There is probably something I can put on my shoe that is quite unique and get a patent for it. All patents are not the same.
We had a witness in the last section who said that, for software and AI, patents are not always the best route. We have to get out of the mode of always thinking that patents are at the pinnacle. All of that is to say that there is a lot of intellectual property, especially in AI, that is being commercialized and protected, but not through the patent route because that is not always the best route.