Howard French’s recent article China’s Economic Revival Minted in Counterfeit asks “What is there to say about a country where something masquerading as the newest Harry Potter book comes out on the market 10 days before the genuine item?” Apparently, what to say is that because Deng Xiaoping announced everyone ought to become rich, no one in China cares about copyright or intellectual property rights. French then goes on:
I have searched in vain for signs of a serious, sustained discussion of counterfeiting and intellectual property violations in the Chinese press. Yes, there are occasional statements to the effect that intellectual property must be respected, but few have bothered to take a close look at the problem, to acknowledge its extent in China or vigorously debate its consequences.
That must have been a very short search, because I plugged words like “cultural industry”, “musicians”, “piracy” and “income” into Baidu and came up with some serious, sustained discussion, such as this long article on the difficulty of protecting royalties from karaoke, Rock God Cui Jian touching on the issue in a 10 year retrospective on Chinese musicians, excerpts from the meeting WIPO and the State Copyright Bureau, and dozens of others. And that was just in Baidu’s news search. There’s more out there, and some touches on the part of China’s weak IP protection that Howard French and many other Western commentators neglect – namely, that piracy wreaks far more damage on China’s domestic film, music and print industries than it does on other nations. Consider that the piracy rate in China is 90%, compared to 27% in the U.S., or that the cultural industries of the U.S., Singapore and Canada are 18-25%, 24.4% and 40% of GDP respectively. China’s? 3.1%. The title to French’s article suggests that counterfeiting has somehow fueled China’s growth. It seems far-fetched, considering piracy and government restrictions have conspired together to reduce China’s cultural industries to the equivalent of a school bake sale.
Part of the problem with piracy is certainly greed and corruption. As Cui Jian notes:
在某些官员的眼里,艺术家对社会的贡献,是远远低于商人,甚至非法商人的贡献。In the eyes of some officials, artists contribution to the community is far below that of businessmen and even illegal contributions.
他们宁愿忽略艺术,而纵容一些经济上的腐败现象,也不愿意在艺术领域里投入更多的关注,甚至有很多政府文化部门之所以存在,其最根本的意义就是限制艺术家的创作,限制所有具有争议性的艺术形式的出现。 They prefer to ignore the arts, and some participate in economic corruption, also none are willing to invest more attention in artistic fields, and even though many government cultural departments exist to foster the arts, in reality their sole purpose is to stifle artistic creation and the appearance of any controversial art.*
Yesterday I went by my local pirated DVD shop. They’ve been closed the last three days, and I asked why. Of course the answer was “the police were coming”. How did they know? “Everybody knows.” Why don’t the police come another time? “Because they’re paid off”. It’s funny, too, because Howard French gets it mostly right on this part when he says:
At the same time, as with product safety problems or intellectual property issues, the government is much like the greyhound on a racetrack chasing the mechanical rabbit. Reality exceeds its grasp, and there is no hope of catching up.
That much is certainly true. If local pirates pay off cops to file a false report, and everybody freakin’ knows (let’s all note that its consider so accepted that telling the foreigner is no big deal), and this happens all over the country – precisely what is the central government suppose to do about it? Start a massive political campaign? Death sentences? The issue is local, as are many others in China, and hanging it on the central government – encouraging the sort of paternalistic authoritarianism that is usually reprimanded – seems a rather stupid idea. Instead, perhaps finding open dialogue and reporting on where it is happening, and commenting on how to strengthen awareness and discussion, would be a better focus. Instead, at the end of French’s piece it is revealed that he’s using his IHT soapbox to bicker with a letter writer who says Westerners should quit bitching and moaning. Suddenly French’s opening about “What is there to say about a country…” not only looks like windbaggery, but it starts to look petty and snide. Is this letter really worth this attention? French translates this one, single letter into “a giant collective shrug in a body of opinion for which the world is effectively divided, consciously or not, into us and them, automatically inoculating the believers against anything perceived as outside criticism.”
Wait a minute: who just took the opinion of one letter, and applied it to a big ol’ mess of people? And when you have the answer to that, tell me just who is the one carving the world into “us” and “them”. One thing I’ve learned by blogging about China is that when a nationalist crank starts trying to push your buttons, you have to remember not to identify them as speaking for China. Because then they’ve got you right where they want you – helping them make it “us” versus “them”. Oh, Howie, you just failed China Blogging 101!
Trent Reznor, of Nine Inch Nails, however, seems to have a better handle on counterfeiting in China. He’s got a whole Chinese language section on his website, where he states:
“As for the special situation in China, it does not seem to be easy to obtain Western music via legal channels, so I have the following suggestion for our fans: If you can find and buy our legal CDs, I express my thanks for your support. If you cannot find it, I think that downloading from the Internet is a more acceptable option than buying pirated CDs. Our music is easy to find on the Internet, and you might not need to spend much effort to find most of our songs. If you like our songs after you’ve heard them, please feel free to share it with your friends. As I have put all my effort and heart into my music, I sincerely hope that more and more people can share the enjoyment with us.”
Instead of lecturing Chinese people on how bad they are, Reznor has elected to engage in dialogue. Chinese people are attracted to counterfeit goods for the same reason Americans are attracted to Chinese (and sometimes counterfeit) goods: they’re cheaper. He’s no fan himself of major record labels and their inflated CD prices. After their last contract album with Universal, NIN going to sell everything online, for “say, $4 an album”.
Reznor was last seen at the Beijing Pop Festival. Cui Jian was there too. I wasn’t. Dammit.
*Thanks to Feng37 for better clean-up of Google translation.
Instead, perhaps finding open dialogue and reporting on where it is happening, and commenting on how to strengthen awareness and discussion, would be a better focus.
Wait, you sling arrows at French for calling for a sustained dialogue and then turn around and call for a sustained dialogue?
French admitted there are lots of one off commentaries and laments on IP rights violations. And you find them doing a search on Baidu.
But no one really takes the problem seriously enough to sustain either a top-down mass movement discussion or a grass-roots local dialogue on IP rights and their value to a society. That’s why the local shops can tell the outsider so openly the situation is a game to put on a good show due to pressures from US State and Commerce. In the same way that restrictions from Beijing on foreign films showing in China is a little bit censorship and a lot more protectionism of politically-connected Chinese film makers.
In all fairness, in taking on Howard French, you are taking on a guy who is notorious for being the laziest of the NYT correspondents in China – and one of the laziest in the NYT foreign correspondent corps. Why they keep him on the staff is a wonder to anyone even remotely associated with the NYT. If his trusty Chinese-language assistants don’t look it up for him, Howard can’t find it.
@Tom: “French admitted there are lots of one off commentaries and laments on IP rights violations.” What French said is that “there are occasional statements to the effect that intellectual property must be respected, but few have bothered to take a close look at the problem, to acknowledge its extent in China or vigorously debate its consequences”. French dismisses any discussion that might be occurring, and then goes on to characterize an entire society based on one letter. I certainly don’t see him calling for dialogue, I see him calling names.
Here’s a question for you Tom: you say “no one really takes the problem seriously”. Who are you talking about? Do you really think that the PRC government could eliminate piracy if they wanted through a top down campaign? I don’t. The economic pressure that drives people to cut corners and copy isn’t going to go away through ideological rhetoric, and Chinese people don’t seem like they’d buy it.
@Anonymous: you said, not me. I don’t know Howard French’s work habits. I do wonder why the NYT employs him doing a China journal though; it doesn’t seem like a good fit.
Recently our dear boy French wrote an article about the protest against Maglev train extension. He made the following statements:
1. The highest speed of MT is 300KMpH. (The Highest speed is 431KMpH/260MpH.)
2. The project is abandoned…(which is not.)
3. …because it is the pet project of downed Chen Liangyu. (which no concrete evidence supports.)
4. A lot of residents protest because they fear magnetic pollution. (Actually the motives are diverse. If you look into a few online MT discussion forums, you will know it.)
I complained on a forum that he basically got very points wrong in the report. And I questioned if he ever made a most basic research in Google or any reliable resources. Now I am glad that I am not the only one who feels the way.
Hey Leo: did you post sources calling French out? I’d love to see the forum post if you did. Drop a link.
I would like revert from the French disparagement (duly justified, of course) back to intellectual property rights. I recently corrected the MA law thesis of a Chinese friend of mine studying at LSE. She spent quite a few months researching the IPR issue. I think that unassuming Chinese scholars like her, who synthesise Western and Chinese sources in an academic setting, come closest to an accurate account.
The thesis makes a few noteworthy points:
1. The military owns quite a lot of factories that produce pirated DVDs, and as in health care and real estate, its profits are considerable in this enterprise. No central policies will discourage such behavior unless alternative forms of income are found for the armed forces.
2. Until recently, most cultural producers in China considered it an honor to be imitated. This affirmed the quality of their work. Only the new generation of musicians, film makers etc. is aware of the legal and economic implications of piracy.
3. The Chinese judiciary lacks the resources to deal with IPR violations in a comprehensive manner. The dilemma is not only the judiciary’s partification or lack of jurisdiction (esp. over the military), but also simply the dearth of well-trained judges.
I think these points contribute far more to the IPR discussion than Howard French’s article.
@Iacob: Hey, thanks for stopping by. I tried here to both criticize French’s article and to suggest more interesting information. I believe that a great deal of China reporting is not only often factually wrong, but often uses outdated stereotypes and ideological biases as crutches to crank out a good headline. In an age where a great deal of Americans still believe Saddam Hussein caused 9-11, I think it becomes even more vital to demand the press be less sensational and more accurate.
That said, there’s lots more on the piracy issue I’d certainly like to know, and I’m excited to hear about your colleagues thesis. Some questions that spring to mind:
1) I’m terribly interested in military involvement in piracy. What kind of sources has she found?
2) Considering that alot of technology that allowed copying of recordings didn’t become widely available to the public until probably the early 80s, is it any wonder imitation by other performers was non-threatening?
3) I agree the judiciary has a long road ahead, but I think we’re getting ahead of ourselves. If its common knowledge that pirates, police and officials are cooperating, then who are you putting in front of a judge in the first place?