Does patent copyright hinder human progress?

The main reason is that the patent right is too long and will expire in a century and a half. Yes, the efforts of predecessors are important, but they are not that important. Generally, it is rare for a product to be used for ten years. Obviously, there is no need to continue to protect its patent right, which is not conducive to social progress. For example, there are only three operating systems in the world, which leads to monopoly or even worse products. Imagine how terrible the world would be if everyone abided by the patent right of weapon technology. Only one country has advanced weapons, and any similar technology is infringement. Then ... all countries were hanged by one country because they couldn't produce weapons with relevant technologies, and finally the whole world was ruled by one country ... Just because the patent right of weapons was ignored, the world was not ruled by one country, so why be stupid about other things? Facts have proved that apart from protecting inventors, long-term patent rights not only failed to promote social progress, but greatly hindered social progress. On the other hand, copyright actually creates a substantial monopoly, so in fact, copyright should be the main income of the copyright owner, while other non-copyright owners can use and improve it at will, and part of the income belongs to the copyright owner, which is conducive to social progress. If we blindly protect the rights and interests of copyright owners, it will inevitably lead to a long-term stagnation of advanced technology in a certain aspect. In other words, the copyright revenue system should be implemented, not the unlimited copyright protection system. Because any invention is based on human civilization and science and technology, don't you think it's shameless that you make an invention on this basis and say it's all your own?