the design of a transistor is supposedly public knowledge. but it can be easily made a trade secret and patented.
the operation of a diode is taught in all solid state physics classes. but this could easily be patented.
how do you distinguish what is going to be an IPR? Would solid state physics be complete without knowledge of diodes and transistors?
why not patent band theory too and keep that secret?
why not patent the idea of an atom?
why not patent the entire theory of quantum physics, so only Germany can legally use quantum physics?
Yes, I agree with you that there is a thin line between the two; however, we can make a distinction between the two based on the funding. Any research that is funded by public funds cannot be IPR property, while the research that is funded by private funds/companies may have the IPR status

