Chapter 1: The Trend of Criticizing China

In recent times, criticizing China has become a popular pastime, but many critics may have ulterior motives. Influenced by powerful manufacturing interests, some politicians are unintentionally undermining the intellectual property framework that has been crucial to U.S. prosperity for centuries.

Lawmakers from both major parties are eager to gain political leverage by denouncing anything related to China. A primary concern is the allegation that Chinese-owned platforms, such as TikTok, are collecting extensive data on American citizens, sharing operational insights about millions of individuals’ everyday activities.

However, this data gathering is not unique to Chinese services. Companies like Facebook, Google, Microsoft, Apple, and Amazon—basically, anyone utilizing a Software as a Service (SaaS) model—are also in the business of data collection. Regardless of nationality, if a company has the capability to gather information, it typically does so, whether for targeted advertising or other purposes. For instance, research from the University of Toronto's Citizen Lab indicates that TikTok and Facebook gather similar types and volumes of user data, including device identifiers crucial for tracking user locations and behaviors. This kind of information is sought after by both spies and marketers worldwide.

As a result, the focus on China diverts attention from the data practices of our own companies. While it’s true that Chinese firms are collecting data, so are American ones—on both their users and Chinese data. When I refer to "we," I mean companies like Facebook, Google, Microsoft, Apple, Twitter, and Amazon, and when I say "ours," I mean the information about you and me.

At the same time, we find ourselves in a fierce competition with China over the future of technology. There is significant concern over the possibility of them acquiring our most advanced technologies and spying on us. However, in our efforts to cripple certain Chinese enterprises—such as Huawei—we risk underestimating the potential damage we could inflict upon ourselves by perpetuating false narratives about these companies.

The U.S. military and other organizations have raised concerns about cargo cranes manufactured by Shanghai Zhenhua Heavy Industries Co. (ZPMC) that are positioned in ports across the U.S. These cranes are seen as possible instruments for gathering sensitive information. Their operational software can be accessed and updated remotely, raising the question of whether they are providing information back to their home country. Yet, the reality of such practices remains unverified.

Similarly, it is unclear whether Huawei’s servers are sending communications data back to China or if TikTok is providing spy agencies with information about our children’s whereabouts and activities.

Yet, a troubling example of self-sabotage emerged during a recent hearing of the Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet, chaired by Daryl Issa. Witness after witness argued that China exploits the patent system to its advantage. Charles Duan, a professor at American University, referred to this as "offensive exploitation." The process involves a Chinese company deceitfully acquiring intellectual property from a U.S. firm, obtaining a patent in China, and subsequently enforcing it against the original U.S. creator.

The consensus seemed to be that the solution to this patent dilemma was to weaken the patent system itself, thereby preventing China from enforcing its patents in the U.S. However, this approach overlooks the fact that the foundation of much of the United States' wealth over the past two centuries has stemmed from patented innovations. Committees like Issa’s are receiving considerable backing for this viewpoint from U.S. corporations. One might wonder why American companies would support weakening their own source of value.

The answer lies in which companies are involved. A significant number of tech firms, including Apple, Intel, Microsoft, Google, and Facebook, prefer to utilize patents defensively. They develop intellectual property for their own use, striving to outpace rivals by rapidly innovating. For them, licensing technology from others is often an unwelcome expense, leading them to favor a weaker patent regime—although they would rarely admit it publicly.

When this group pushes for political measures to limit Huawei’s intellectual property rights, they simultaneously restrict U.S. firms like Qualcomm, which thrive on innovation and licensing. Weakening or disregarding property rights equates to denying them, eroding a critical pillar of the U.S. technology development ecosystem. Intellectual property rights should be upheld universally—whether in China, the United States, or elsewhere. Attempts to target China's intellectual property laws could provoke retaliation against U.S. companies.

The dynamics at play are complex, but we must be cautious not to allow the hidden agendas of specific corporations and politicians to jeopardize the foundation of U.S. prosperity. While it may be simple to criticize China, we must recognize the nuances in this debate. Some participants may have good intentions but are misguided, while others may fully understand their actions. Educating politicians—who often lack technological expertise—and the public about the risks embedded in the intricate details of these subcommittee discussions is an ongoing challenge.

Section 1.1: A Closer Look at Data Collection

Understanding the parallels in data collection practices helps frame the conversation around intellectual property and privacy.

Chapter 2: Consequences of Weakening Intellectual Property

In a recent congressional hearing, the implications of China's patent practices were discussed. This included witness testimonies outlining how China allegedly manipulates the patent system.

At this point, we turn to a video that highlights concerning trends in China's environmental practices, which may have implications for intellectual property and public health.

This video, titled "In China, Something Disgusting is Coming Out of Fire Hoses! - Episode #166," discusses alarming environmental practices in China that raise questions about regulatory oversight.

Furthermore, we examine another critical aspect of China's practices that affect local communities, as demonstrated in the next video.

The second video, "China Drops Toxic Rockets on Villagers - Episode #219," reveals the impact of Chinese industrial practices on rural populations, further complicating the discussion around technology and ethics.