I'll ask db to respond more fully on the article. and in no way do I support China's blatant theft of technology and design. But the article begins with this statement:
"in the private sector a patent troll acquires vague and outdated patents—not for the purpose of producing an invention or a technology—but as grounds to sue an inventor or company. The troll will claim that a new widget bears some relation to its patent and therefore the troll should be paid a license fee. If target does not willingly pay the tribute, the troll drags them into court. Attorney fees in patent litigation often exceed $1 million dollars for a defendant. Hence, there is much incentive to settle with the troll."

I vehemently disagree with this premise. First of all, there is no such thing as an "out-dated patent." If it were out-dated, then either a) no one would be infringing it to produce their product or b) it would have been expired, therefore no one could sue for infringement against it. As well, in an infringement suit, you cannot force a party to license your technology. You can enforce your patent right to keep a party from using your patented technology in your product. Finally, there is no such thing as a "vague" patent. This is the phrase of someone who knows nothing about patents. It is relatively easy for any lay person to do a simple search and find patents which may be similar to the technology they have developed. IF it's in the ballpark, it makes good business sense to have an attorney give you an in-depth opinion. 1. you don't want to get sued and 2. why would you want to copy what someone else is already doing? 3. approaching the owner of a patent up your tech alley to possibly license their technology is how inventors get paid. Inventing is a profession.
Litigating as a strategy. It can be part of monetizing one's intellectual property portfolio. One would prefer a licensing arrangement as it is an income stream. However, if infringing companies refuse to care they are infringing, they have to pay a price for their theft. It's how business works. If you're starting or investing in a business, know the IP in your space. IT's part of business, like keeping books or knowing your competition. Buying up US IP and vigorously prosecuting it in the US is more a function of capitalism than espionage. It shows that China "gets" we have stronger enforcement in the US relative to other countries in the world, including China. We have Chinese clients who get patents in the US even though they're making their product in China. They know patent law is weak in China.
What I find troubling is a strategy by foreign companies to contest issued patents. Let's say you have a patent. Your foreign competitor can use the US patent system to keep you in court over the validity of your already issued and monetized property! This is new since 2011 and part of patent "reform" and "harmonizing" with the international community. It's like saying let's take our Constitution and "harmonize" it with Russia's.

Note the inherent contradiction in the article. It first complains that IP is not being protected and then it complains when it is being protected. I guess this is fine because in one case it is foreigners stealing our technology and in the second case it is foreigners enforcing their IP rights.

So Dictatorland is spending money on inventions they have no intention of monetizing. Then people will invent around these and invent on top these and then they will have to buy the next inventions.. There has never been an invention in the history of the world that cannot be designed around.

This is worse than trying to buy up all the land in a country, because there is a limited amount of land, but an unlimited number of inventions.

"The government of Dictatorland then compels the new patent owner to refuse to license its patents to any company in Freedomland, as part of Dictatorland’s campaign of economic warfare. "
Isn't it the same thing if the gov't of Dictator land purchases any means of production from a citizen of Freedomland. The citizen has the money, and Dictatorland has a goose that lays golden eggs. Money is medium of exchange, not a store of value, so the Freedomland citizen will soon invest that wealth into projects that have a chance of making more geese that lay golden eggs. Dictatorland will use the profits from their property just as they would any investment.
I don't see why it's a special case if the means of production (investment, goose, or whatever we're calling it) happens to be IP.

what you are ignoring is the capitalist initiative. it is pervasive. it starts as a govt initiative but it says so much to those citizens who are awake. Stealing? not so much. but buying...ah, tehy are engaging in capitalistic behavior. everyone watches...soaks in...3 decades later...:)If you purchase the patent-there is no infringement. the inventor(s) are funded(encouraged) to create teh next thing...all is right with the world...:)