I suspect that it won't end for a few reasons. Even if a publisher does not believe in the shtick, they do not want library lending to become socially acceptab

I suspect that it won't end for a few reasons. Even if a publisher does not believe in the shtick, they do not want library lending to become socially acceptable and easily accessible since it would erode the market of people who are willing and able to pay. Another reason is that some markets are going to be more susceptible to lost revenue than others. It is possible that library lending represents a loss of revenue for popular authors who have no need of exposure or have easier access to other forms of exposure. Of course, this isn't always true. Many authors toil away in obscurity or serve niche markets, where the exposure is probably beneficial. The publishers who have popular authors have the greatest incentive to oppose library lending. Measures are likely another issue. It is far easier to count lost sales (e.g. X% of lending) than it is to count sales from increased exposure. That X% of lending also makes it easier to calculate how much libraries should pay in order to generate similar revenues.