I can’t decide whether I should laugh, cry, roll up into a fetal position, or shrink with embarassment. No, truth be told, you can file this under “totally not surprised”, with this article about Chinese mainstream newspapers routinely stealing copyrighted images for their own publications. Born in Canada, I still haven’t received any substantive answer from anyone who is “Chinese” to the question: “why is there such a culture of acceptance towards the piracy of intellectual property?” I mean its almost laughable (like Elton John), how China in the 21st century is known for many things — but first and foremost, its known for getting cheap, knocked off goods, and intellectual property piracy, from software to content, to everything else in between. Go China.
-
Pages
-
Sponsor
-
Categories
-
Archives
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006

7 Comments
” I still haven’t received any substantive answer….”
Me, I blame Karl Marx. ;-)
(On Chinese TV you can hear things like Beatles recordings on advertisements. For clothing, the label is just another part of the style, but there’s still perceived value in non-counterfeit goods.)
Seriously, as more and more people in China are able to produce digital bits, I suspect we’ll see more regard and respect for the digital bits produced by others.
You raise a great point Tony, bur forget about copyright for a moment. I think an emerging “cultural tag” that could be a bigger issue for China is with respect to legal copyright items that are cheaply produced/manufactured.
Increasingly we are hearing of recalls around potential health risks with goods coming out of China. Lead paint in Thomas the Train and Fisher Price toys, potential toxins in toothpaste etc seem to be increasing in frequency.
Quality brands are taking reputational and revenue-based hits as standards fall from bad to worse – in my book this is a far more serious situation than copyright for the economy of China if it continues down the same path.
A great eye-opener of a film on some related issues is “Manufactured Landscapes” by Ed Burtynsky.
I’m not sure I get the confusion – we’re talking about a society in transition from communism to capitalism. Why is it so surprising that the importance of ownership might be lost in China? Isn’t private property the defining aspect of capitalism?
First of all we’re talking about intellectual property, not ownership of private property. Second of all the ‘transition’ period has been going on for at least ten years, so pleading ignorance is hardly going to cut it. The issue is that there is theft — knowing theft — of intellectual property that is going on in such a pervasive manner, it makes you ask questions about a culture in general.
Okay – but 10 years is nothing when we’re speaking about transforming culture. When you raise the idea of theft, you predicate that on the notion that ownership is a universal, ahistorical idea that everyone understands the same way. It isn’t – it’s a historical, political and economic result of democratic capitalism with a clear trajectory that began with the switch from feudalism to mercantilism. To argue that one should ‘question the culture’ based on an approach to IP is to posit capitalism as the only possible model of understanding whereby those who do not respect ownership are essentially going against the ‘obvious truth’.
I’m not suggesting, however, that theft or communism are good things – I think things would be better if IP were respected everywhere. I just think it’s misleading to argue the deficiency of Chinese culture because it does not ‘match up’ to Western conceptions of property and rights. You can’t assert a contingent, historical development as ‘the only way’ and then fault a society with an entirely different history for not following that way.
Nav,
Your arguments make sense in an ivory-tower-ish sort of way.
Here are my thoughts.
If what your suggesting is true, then why haven’t we seen the same large-scale extent of copyright violations anywhere else in the world? What is it that’s unique about China that allows this kind of phenomenon to exist? I’m no China scholar, so that’s why I’m throwing this one out there. It might have a complex societal/political/cultural answer.
On the hand, let’s bring things down, right down to the ground, for a second, because there is a much easier litmus test.
Ask the average person in China whether or not buying non-original copied music, software, or movies is wrong.
We can debate the finer details of what “right” and “wrong” are within a larger judaeo-christian context versus that of a confucian ethos — but I think we both know that the answer is that almost NO ONE would think that its wrong.
Rather, that there is nothing “wrong” with doing it because no one is going to catch them.
And that’s exactly my point, because its not an issue of being Americano-centric (if you want to use that neologism) or pro-democratic/capitalistic in these beliefs about intellectual property rights.
Communism is a mere blip on the map in terms of Chinese history and culture. Its been around for less than 100 years, and really only influenced perhaps two or three generations of Chinese, tops.
Capitalism existed long before Communism, even in the forms you mention (mercantilism, for example), but if you want to bring it way, way, way, back, you don`t need sophisticated explanations to explain or understand the fundamental kernel of truth here.
If I created something and I`m trying to sell it, copying it and trying to sell it without my permission isn`t right. Or claiming that its your own, even when you know I’ve created it.
I don’t think those ideas are necessarily unique to any culture at any time period.
Finally, if you want to get really nitty and gritty about “not understanding” another culture, let’s get right down to it. I am Chinese. My parents are Chinese. My wife is Chinese. I have Chinese friends. My in-laws are Chinese. I know people from China.
Everyone, without exception, knows that the violation of intellectual property issues is wrong. Everyone understands this, although they might not use the same terms. But no one can tell me why, en masse, why its okay for “everyone” to be doing it, either explictly, implicitly, or being complicit with the whole thing to the point where its affected how the many people view an entire country.
Tony,
Thanks for a thoughtful response.
I guess where we differ is on this question of the kernel of truth. I am suggesting that notions of right and wrong are enmeshed in culture, history and politics. When you state that ‘Everyone, without exception, knows that the violation of intellectual property issues is wrong’, you assume that all systems value ownership equally, a point I would disagree with. For people to have a sense that IP violation is wrong, they first have to value IP and individual rights. If a cultural/political/economic system (and it’s always all three of those, never just one) has differing conceptions not only of ownership but also of the individual and the primacy of individual rights, then approaches to questions of IP will inevitably be different.
The thing I’m getting at is epistemological difference – by what objective scale do people determine right and wrong? What transhistorical rulebook exists to determine laws of ownership? None.
I cannot explain to you why people people ‘think it’s okay’ because I just don’t have the background. My rough guess is what I’ve already said – that the concept of intellectual property is one too enmeshed in democratic capitalist notions of ownership and economy. What I can suggest, however, is that despite what we think about IP, claiming a violation of ‘the kernel of truth’ is to make that classic double move: subjectively assert a piece of information as objective fact and then critique those who do not confirm to the contingent, produced ‘truth’ as those who are going against that which is obvious and given.
2 Trackbacks
[...] brain. An editorial comment about MS patients? Unlikely. Tony Hung wonders whether it’s a cultural thing, and Joey De Villa at Global Nerdy thinks it might have something to do with the kind of animation [...]
[...] screens to screens, looks so identical, it almost looks shameless. I guess after this post, its unfair to be knocking Chinese … er, knock-offs, as I’m sure “Web2.0″ around the world probably means [...]