Hacker News Reader

Comment by gonvaled | Hacker News Reader

The IP laws have been written by the US, for the US, and its terms keep on changing to continue protecting US interests.

The IP laws should be a trade-off: temporary protection of inventors / creators, so that progress happens and consumers get a good deal. Instead, HN is already aware how IP laws get abused. The effects of those abuses are felt largely outside the US: it allows the US to foster its economic and cultural dominance.

All thanks to founding and controlling the international bodies in charge of ruling on IP matters.

View on HN

I advise you to reflect on the bias of your own view points.

China has been pulling the same bullying tactics towards EU and S.Korea/Japan as well. IP transfer, forced partnership, etc. Notice how EU, South Korea and Japan haven't really been opposing this ordeal between China and US? They would also like to see China start playing fair, unfortunately there is very few economies can standup to China right now.

China has been quite the bully towards EU nations (though not EU as whole yet). Here in Sweden, China went on full on propaganda mode over some Chinese tourists being kicked out of a hostel, and this made it to the Chinese national news yesterday.

The US did initially include the European Union in this trade war, but when the EU threatened to respond with a import levies that affected Harley Davidson motorbikes manufactured in a Republican-voting state, the US backed down [1].

Chinese media (and social media particularly) does regularly cover stories about Chinese people outside of China involved in situations such as these, whether it's a high-profile business figure [2], or ordinary Chinese people involved in non-ordinary conflicts. Including the narrative that Chinese people don't get justice or support from local police when they are victims to criminal activity, that's regularly reported in Chinese media.

UK media does the same thing, any disaster always has a mention of how many British citizens are involved, sometimes who they are. And a regular diet of outrage of British tourists coming face-to-face with the legal consequences of their behaviour across the world.

Brexit revelations shows me that China trades using WTO rules with Europe. There does seem to be movement on that front too. [3], [4]

Though, with trade arrangement with WTO rule, it's worth asking why US aren't resolving their dispute within the WTO. We shouldn't glorify bullies, even if they are bullying other bullies.

[1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43926092 [2] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-hna-chairman/chinas-hna-c... [3] https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-china-eu/eu-pushes-china-o... [4] https://www.politico.eu/article/donald-trump-china-eu-trade-...

>The US did initially include the European Union in this trade war, but when the EU threatened to respond with a import levies that affected Harley Davidson motorbikes manufactured in a Republican-voting state, the US backed down [1].

I suggest you read your own article. The "backed down" part is referring to a previous trade war under Bush.

"The IP laws have been written by the US, for the US, and its terms keep on changing to continue protecting US interests."

What?

The US has only written IP laws in it's own jurisdiction. Europe, and other nations definitely write their own laws.

Nations make agreements with each other for their own benefit, for example, there is an IP section within the WTO.

If China, or anyone else, thinks they are better of without having IP laws - that's fine. Then nobody should respect their IP either.

The other problem is that China is part of the WTO and they are supposed to actually be doing one thing, but they are actually doing another ... i.e. they are out-of-bounds of their own treaties.

It was perfectly rational, in 1980's and 1990's for China to ignore IP laws, and interestingly - it was rational for the rest of us to allow them to do it.

But if you want a 'seat at the table' of major economies, that needs to change.

And it's in China's best interest to do so as well.

Come on, we all know how the US has asserted itself internationally. Napster, Mega, the list is endless.

this comment provides very little data to back what you’re saying. The WTO's Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), negotiated during the 1986-94 Uruguay Round, introduced intellectual property rules into the multilateral trading system for the first time. This was before China entered the WTO. It made the choice to join nonetheless.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com