Chow,D . "Enforcement Against Counterfeiting in the People's Republic of China" Northwestern journal of international law & business [0196-3228] 20.3 447-.

 

    This article is written in a clear and precise manner.  The subject matter is extremely valuable to any study of intellectual property rights in China, as it deals specifically with current methods of enforcement for counterfeiting.  Unlike many articles, this paper does not present theoretical reasons for China’s inability to police its IPR problems but gives specific reasons and examples of how Chinese law enforcement works.
    Daniel Chow chose to focus exclusively on counterfeiting, which is a subset of IPR violations.  Counterfeiting can infringe on both copyrighted material and patented material but necessarily violates trademark law.  Therefore, counterfeiting is an extremely important subject matter for IPR studies.  In his article, Chow leads the reader through the different stages of enforcement for counterfeit goods.  He starts with the process of seizing and confiscating goods and paraphernalia and proceeds to describe the process and result of fines against offenders.  He then poses reasons for why these fines are inadequate; for example, monetary values are based on the price of the counterfeit goods, not the price of the brand products.
    Next, Chow explains how criminal liability is enacted in Chinese law, and discusses the problems, such as the burden of proof lying upon the prosecutors and not the counterfeiter.  For example, to prove criminal liability the prosecutor must show that the counterfeiter made profits of at least $6000.  This is extremely difficult because illegal businesses don’t keep legitimate records, and therefore criminal liability would be nearly impossible to prove.  Chow follows by exploring whether manufacturers, distributors, or landlords of retailers are prosecuted most and who should be targeted more.  Chow then discusses how civil action works in China.  Finally, he presents some problems for future enforcement against counterfeiting.
    This article contains a large amount of useful information and is presented in a very methodical and simple manner.  The information is useful because it demonstrates from an empirical and not theoretical perspective how IPR enforcement works in China.  This becomes important for the project's thesis when one considers the practical nature of taking any approach other than a gradual increase in IPR protection.

Linek,E . "International Efforts Are Achieving Credible IP Enforcement Even Amid Chronic Abuse" Intellectual property & technology law journal [1534-3618] 18.3 (2006). 4-7.

 

   This article is short and poses little insight into the situation of intellectual property rights in China, yet it does provide valuable statistics about the levels of piracy in China. The statistics present an optimistic view of the situation by stating the increased number of criminal prosecutions for IPR violations; however, the statistics leave out the pessimistic view that the number of violations are possibly rising and that could explain the increase in prosecutions.
    Yet, despite the lack of in-depth analysis provided, this article hints at some of the basic themes of more insightful works. Examples of these are that China has historical traditions that impede its compliance with international standards of intellectual copyright protection and that China has too many administrative bureaucracies to effectively enforce IPR. The article also presents an interesting view that unfortunately has no support: an assertion that because China has joined the WTO, its institutions will adapt in a positive manner.
    The statistics in this article include the numbers of criminal prosecutions in China for IPR infringement and estimates of the amount of money lost by US businesses because of piracy. Also, there is a comparison over time of changes in these statistics. These numbers, although vague, can be used to present a case with nearly any goal in mind and, therefore, are valuable in research about IPR in China.
    The last important aspect of this article is that it places China in the context of the larger developing world. It points out that China represents the single largest market (in numbers of people) in the world, and because it is considered to have a developing economy, China plays a large role in determining the stance of other developing economies. This is an important message and illuminates the significance of understanding the IPR situation in China and, therefore, the significance of China taking a gradual approach to strengthening its IPRs in a broader, global sense.