it simply provides a right to exclude others from practicing within the scope of the claims until expiration. And that's assuming the patent is valid and enforceable.

That being said, there are some instances where a patent more or less help provide a de facto monopoly during its term, a patented and FDA approved pharmaceutical with few competitive alternatives being a prime example.

A primary motivation for a patent system is to encourage public disclosure of technology (as oppsed to keeping such technology a trade secret) in order "to promote the progress of science and useful arts."

That being said, many business leaders tend to view patents as a cumbersome drag on commercial activity when you consider the cost of drafting, prosecuting, and maintaining patents, the cost of risks assesments with respect to competitors' (or non-practicing entities') patents, and the potential cost of patent litigation.

For example, I'm currently working as an in-house patent attorney. Most business leaders in my company would view me as an "overhead cost." In contrast, when I worked in a law firm, I was a "revenue generator."