"What Is the Chinese Economic Model?" author reports server attacked

"What Is the Chinese Economic Model?" author reports server attacked
tapsns.com

The US government has been trying to get China to "behave" for quite some time. One of the very obvious points of contention is copyright law - as someone once said, "Chinese copyright is the right to copy anything they want". Now, the previous article painted this from the point of view of massive industrial IP theft - theft of patents, technologies, etc.

But we all know that there's another kind of IP that has a lot of influence over the governments of the world, and that's media IP - music, books, movies, etc.

It's clear that both are happening to some extent, but what are the proportions? Is 99.9% of the "Chinese IP problem" to do with stolen media? To do with the fact that you can buy pirated DVDs on every street corner? Or is it 99%? 90%? 10%? Basically, is the main force behind all this anti-china discussion the media lobby, or is it a somewhat more bona fide effort to protect more legitimate industry?

Cause I have to say - if I have a choice between the Chinese model of media copyright (i.e., no copyright protection) and the US one, I'll pick the Chinese one. It's a better starting point for improvement than the current US model.

We've been very good about ignoring what China does in China. (One could argue that Americans, myself included, are exceptionally good at this actually!) This recent wave of controversy is about what China does outside of China.

I would expect the same outcry to occur if any other country was staging the type of operations the PRC regularly conducts in foreign infrastructure. Frankly, the fact that outcry is so long in coming is the only thing that surprises most people in security.

I agree that people need to be careful to not go overboard, but your assertion that no one should ever be critical of China because they're different is equally absurd. Different systems deserve to be appropriately examined and talking about the ramifications of each is both appropriate and necessary.

As for 'if it's different, kill it': I've noticed this in my discussions about China. Many of the people I talked to that supported China's handling of things (or were themselves Chinese) disagreed with me on a fundamental value basis which you can't argue. I value human rights far, far above nationalism, yet those people did not. I simply do not see how they could do that, and, I'm guessing, they can't see how I could consider human rights more important than national pride. The Internet is mostly ruled the by United States and Europe - if the word 'ruled' is even applicable. Anyway, the US and Europe tend to share the idea of human rights > nationalism, and are thus pushing it in other places too.

Now, my opinion. I don't think you can go with the 'he just has a different view than you, everyone's view is good' thing here. I think there is a 'good view' and a 'bad view' - where the "goodness" of a view is characterized by long term societal benefit and societal contentment. Obviously, I think the 'good-er' view is one which emphasizes human rights over nationalism, because while allowing human rights might cause some unpleasant effects in the short term, in the long term, it will result in a better country with a happier populace.

Why are there riots? Why is there a need to suppress information? Because people are unhappy. Clearly, the current system of suppression isn't working perfectly. In fact, it isn't working perfectly by definition, since if everyone were happy, this wouldn't be needed. (By my definition, of course.)

Now, I realize that my point of view may sound biased - incredibly so. Maybe even something along the lines of "I'm right because the things I say are better". But you say: "Just because it's different doesn't mean you must kill it." You don't have to, but perhaps it will be better for the world as a whole if you do?

I'd love to hear your counterargument if you're willing to write another sentence about china. (Ack, that sounded snarky. Wasn't meant to.)

China claims all of South China Sea http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8047206.stm

China that sent 250,000 troop over to teach Vietnam a lesson during 1979 war http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Vietnamese_War.

On and on...we need to be tough on China. American CEO needs to think long term before moving jobs to China.