While I was preparing the Carnival of the Liberated this morning I stumbled across this interesting morsel from Najma of A Star from Mosul:
Windows, Office, Norton AntiVirus and all of the other famous software that are expensive for normal people to buy are bought with what equals one dollar here.. No one buys an original copy, it’s only for the shop from which we buy the copies. I have nothing original at home among 100s of CDs, except for some drivers installations which are usually provided with the driver.
Lots of Americans aren’t aware of it but in much of the world—particularly in the Middle East and Asia—a CD store is a place where CD’s are copied for re-sale.
You don’t have to look too far to read articles whining about the U. S. trade deficit with the rest of the world. Here are two articles from today alone. The Reuters article has a typical comment:
“A currency revaluation cannot solve the trade deficit problem. The deficit is there because wages in China are $5 per day and in the U.S. $200 per day including benefits,” Duncan said ahead of the publication of an updated edition of his book.
We are running a trade deficit because our wages are too high; we are running a trade deficit because their wages are too low; we are running a trade deficit because our currency is overvalued; we are running a trade deficit because their currencies are undervalued; we are running a trade deficit because we’re buying too many foreign products. These would all be great answers if they were true. Let me add another explanation: we are running a trade deficit because we re-directed our economy away from producing hard goods and towards services and the production of intellectual property and the world is just full of people who don’t believe that intellectual property makes any sense. It’s like leaving a twenty dollar bill in the middle of the street—somebody is bound to come by and pick it up.
Take my favorite example, China. Almost all software in use in China is pirated:
Sell one operating system to every citizen in China and you could make some real money. But in China software is pirated, not sold legitimately. What’s a producer of intellectual property to do?
The future of business in China–and why it is both tantalizing and troublesome–is on display in Beijing at the bustling Hailong market, an elbow-your-way-in set of hundreds of stalls peddling computers and software. Just a ten-minute drive from the offices of Microsoft China, the market sells everything from ready-to-go laptops to motherboards, monitors and “mice” for the boldest shoppers bent on building a PC on the cheap.
At one busy table a Chinese-language version of Windows XP, Microsoft’s latest operating system, comes in a shrink-wrapped box with the familiar logo. The price–$245–amounts to four months’ salary for an average Chinese worker. Too steep? No problem. At a nearby stand a woman reaches under the counter to a tall stack of CDs on which XP has been illegally copied. Gentle bargaining brings the bootleg price down to $5.50.
That is the paradox of China for Microsoft (nasdaq: MSFT – news – people ). Like many U.S. companies, Microsoft is mesmerized by the dream of capturing its share of business here–if only it could overcome some rather monumental barriers. Piracy is rampant: More than 90% of the application software used here comes from illegal copies. It has been only 13 years since the nation adopted its first copyright law, and it later tightened the rules only reluctantly, mostly to win support for its admission to the World Trade Organization. Comfortably in WTO now and enjoying a $30.4 billion trade surplus with the U.S., China scarcely bothers to enforce the laws.
Nearly all music CD’s and movie DVD’s sold in China are pirated:
Rampant piracy in the Asia-Pacific region cost Hollywood’s leading studios more than $896m (£475m) in 2004, according to official figures just released.
Studio lobbyist the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) coordinated more than 12,000 raids of illegal DVD burning labs and other outlawed facilities in more than 13 countries last year, including China, Malaysia and Hong Kong.
In fact those three countries are regarded as the worst offenders when it comes to sales of bootlegs, disc burning machines and the like.
Official data reveals that more than 50 million pirate VCDs, DVDs and recordable CDs were seized, while more than 3,156 optical disc burners were confiscated last year.
Integrated circuits, pharmaceuticals,
An estimated 97 percent of Western drugs sold in China are fake. Many genuine products are not sold here simply because manufacturers fear they will be copied. Inadequate IP protection also discourages drug companies from spending on research and development (the cost of developing a new drug: about US $800,000).
movies, DVD’s, software: there is very little that the United States produces other than agricultural products (which they put import quotas on) and munitions (which we put restrictions on) that the Chinese can’t and won’t pirate.
So what’s the scope of the problem?
WASHINGTON – The United States could bring a World Trade Organization case against China for piracy of copyrighted material, such as music, software and films, a top Bush administration official said on Monday.
“I think we would take a serious look if we could bring the evidence together to make that case to the WTO,” U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick said during remarks at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has estimated U.S. companies lose more than $200 billion in China each year because of sales of counterfeited and pirated goods.
Yes, $200 BILLION. Our trade deficit with China in 2004 was $162 billion or, said another way, if China were playing fairly and honestly all other things being equal we’d be running a $48 billion dollar surplus with China. And nobody (except for the Chinese) would be talking about revaluing currencies or Americans consuming too much.
That’s money that should be going into research and development, hiring more software developers and engineers (some of whom would surely be hired here), and producing more intellectual property but instead $162 billion dollars per year is going into Chinese banks.
I don’t see any real likelihood of this situation righting itself, the Chinese are unlikely to take anything but show measures to correct things, and I don’t believe that any outside agency (like the WTO) will actually do anything to correct the situation.
So, what can be done? As I see it there are several alternatives:
- We can impose import duties equal in amount to the estimated amount of pirated materials on the goods of the violating countries. I can hear the economists screaming Riccardian comparative advantage from here. Not to mention the WTO.
- We can negotiate with the various violating nations to induce them to enforce U. S. intellectual property rights. That, as Roosevelt’s vice president Texas Jack Garner said of the office of the vice president, would be worth a bucket of warm spit.
- We can abolish intellectual property laws here (and refuse to honor other countries’ intellectual property laws). That would induce investment here in hard product-producing industries rather than intellectual property-producing industries. The dislocation would be enormously difficult (probably more difficult than the dislocation that produced the economy we’re living in now back in the 1980’s) but at least we’d have something to trade.
- We can impose a consumption tax (as so many economists e.g. Brad DeLong, Gary Becker have urged). Our standards of living would fall. And overseas pirates would take over every new industry that arose from the increased investment. It’s a helluva lot easier to reverse engineer than it is to engineer.
- We can do nothing and keep buying and borrowing until the flywheel comes off.
I’m betting we’ll adopt the last alternative.
Well done, and thanks.
I will return 🙂
Interesting blog.
The Brits shook their fists with impotent rage at American theft of their technology during a great portion of the 19th Century. I’m not sure there’s much we can do about this until China, like India, understands that ultimately it’s in its own interests to strengthen its property rights.
Note that that’s where I came down, too, praktike. There is a difference, though: Britain hadn’t staked its future on what Americans expropriated. We have.
Okay, I’ll bite. Is it in China’s and India’s best interests? I’m not so sure.
And, of course, it’s not just China and India. It’s the whole world except possibly for the EU.
Sorry–what I meant was that India HAS been strengthening its IP, and is reaping the benefits of this. There was a long comparison of China and India some time ago in the Economist that talked about this, and I’m sure there has been other commentary on that elsewhere.
We can also continue as we have been and see that the flywheel does not come off bec. we continue to lower the tax rate which (1)increases productivity; and (2)increases the amount of revenue govt brings in. Which makes us more prosperous.
Which makes intellectual theft elsewhere unpleasant but irrelevant.
We’re so far ahead of the curve that it’s hard to see that when others catch up to us in terms of intellectual productivity, they are going to demand the same safeguards…
I’m reminded of the revolution the Quakers introduced into business. By always dealing honestly, they attracted a larger market share which then induced others to become honest in an effort to gain back some of their lost business.
Dymphna, lowering the tax rate per se does not increase productivity. If increased capital investment takes place as a result of reduced taxes, that will, indeed, increase productivity. But taking the extra money in your pocket as the result of lower taxes and buying electronics, clothes little to incentivize increased increased capital investment here.
That’s why I was against a reduction of personal income tax rates back in 2002 and favored eliminating the depreciation schedule for businesses which would have rewarded capital investment more directly.
But you’ve missed the point of my post: we’re running a large trade deficit with China and a substantial component of that deficit can be accounted for by intellectual property.
China only has a very small number of options for what they’ll do with all the U. S. bonds they’re stacking up. They can dump them (at a loss) and not buy more. That will have a substantial effect on the U. S. ability to finance the federal debt. They can buy stuff that we make. Mostly that’s agricultural products and, in the short run, that would result in a substantial run-up in food prices here (which would have a disproportional impact on the poor). Or they can buy U. S. asset e.g. land. None of these alternatives are all that appealing.
“At one busy table a Chinese-language version of Windows XP, Microsoft’s latest operating system, comes in a shrink-wrapped box with the familiar logo. The price–$245–amounts to four months’ salary for an average Chinese worker. Too steep? No problem. At a nearby stand a woman reaches under the counter to a tall stack of CDs on which XP has been illegally copied. Gentle bargaining brings the bootleg price down to $5.50.”
Kind of makes you wonder why Microsoft even produces a Chinese-language version of the operating system? Are they getting enough actual sales of it to justify its existence?
Ken, I think that companies like Microsoft look at China and its more than a billion population and see dollar (or should that be yuan?) signs so big that they obscure everything else.
I quite like #3 — and open source stuff, with lots more Awards (like the X prize, Nobel, etc.) to support innovation.
There would be an increase in investment in real production, so that $5.50 might even drop to $2 or so — why not have all software and all movies and all music and all books available to ALL in the world? Then the incentive to have a computer goes up, and those who want to sell stuff to get money will be focused on selling lower cost computers.
And advisory services.
I’m not as afraid of the dislocation as of the police needed to stop nice humans from sharing.
Dean Baker would appreciate your comments.
American business got spoiled with the American
public, they thougght they could bully themselves
into ripping off everybody.
No wonder when the Chinese say, “Up yours!” they get so offended.
I say good for the Chinese. America is full of
whiny bitches and we deserve it.
Does IP really serve the economy? I have my
doubts.
The businessman/scientist who genetically engineered one ear of corn per stalk gave away the seed. Seems
to me we are doing quite well producing corn as
a result. (He is doing just fine as well.)
People who like IP are just a bunch of greedy
self-serving businessmen. There is no evidence
that IP serves the economy as a whole.
Since self-interest is the noblest motivation
in capitalism, why are all of companies complaining
about how China is doing things in their own
best interest?
I guess Gates’ self-interest is noble, the Chinese
self-interest is depraved. Those savages.
So would it be better for America if China stole French software?
We had the same problems with Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea.
Once their GDP went up and they started developing their own IP they joined the club.
The pain only lasted 20 or 30 years.
Think long term.
M. Simon, what French software?
And there are more Chinese than Japanese, Koreans, and Taiwanese put together by an order of magnitude. And they’re significantly poorer.
In the long-run we are all dead. The Japanese, Koreans, and Taiwanese did not have the kind of command system that the Chinese do. The total size of China and the magnitude of its problems could make the pain, as you put it, last 50 or 100 years. Or forever.
Right concept, wrong ideas.
I’ve been arguing this point with people for a number of years now, that, if we actually calculated in the TRUE value of IP into our balance sheets, that things would look radically different. This would be one reason that the economy hasn’t collapsed despite the Miseans (likely correct) impression that it should.
The whole scheme of IP protection needs to be rethought. The old scheme of protecting the containers simply does not and cannot work. The reasons should be obvious from the following concatenation of considerations:
It is generally granted to be a truism that the internet treats censorship as noise, and routes around it. Now —
1) Censorship is someone saying, “This we deem dangerous, therefore you may not access it.”
2) Copyright is someone saying, “This you have not paid for, therefore you may not access it.”
Right. Both are about controlling access.
It should be clear: “The internet treats copyright as noise and routes around it.”
This says that copyright as-is can’t work with a functional internet any more than censorship does.
Two things:
a) In no sense do I mean to suggest that copyright is morally the same as censorship, only that as fuctional actions they have the same problems.
b) In no sense do I wish to suggest that creators don’t deserve rewards for their creations. This is most definitely not the juvenile “information should be free”. Information is someone’s hard work massaging data into a useable perspective — be that data random bits, images, musical notes, or letters of an alphabet. Maybe data should be free. Information is someone’s time spent producing something usable, no different from a manufactured good in that sense alone (lots of other differences outside the scope of this discussion)
I’d strongly recommend anyone reading this to read John Perry Barlow’s excellent treatise on the matter:
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/2.03/economy.ideas.html?pg=1
The truth of the matter is that we need a system which rewards people for creating things and making them available for use. That almost certainly will not include control over that creation, however. Control is no longer possible with ideas and concepts, the entire functioning of an IP economy depends on the free flow of ideas and concepts. Reward will have to be derived some other way. A tax which gets distributed based on search engine hits, for example. A napster charge. Perhaps (probably) some complex calculation of these and other metrics.
There will be a solution, it’s just not a simple or obvious one.
I saw that you have a page that discusses patent-related resources at http://www.theglitteringeye.com/archives/001039.html. I wanted to suggest adding http://www.freepatentsonline.com to the page. This web site has free PDF downloading (instead of having to page through TIFFs like at the US PTO). It is by far the best free patent searching site.
I saw that you have a page that discusses patent-related resources at http://theglitteringeye.com/?p=1032. I wanted to suggest adding http://www.freepatentsonline.com to the page. This web site has free PDF downloading (instead of having to page through TIFFs like at the US PTO). It is by far the best free patent searching site.
It’s the only cost-free way to reduce our trade deficit, and it should increase the returns and incentives for producing more of it, at a time when globalization and technology make intellectual property a central factor in U.S.
Bernanke has a big job ahead of him.
We cannot sustain 800 bilion a year trade deficits. We cannot export our way out of this mess. The only answer is a sharply lower dollar to drive manufactruing home and to lower the trade deficit. The dollar has much farther to fall. What you are seeing is a long term effort (it will take 20 years) to get the trade deficit back under 1% of GDP. We are currently running a trade imbalance of nearly 6% of GDP. No nation can do this. The IMF would be stepping in to help any nation if its trade imbalance went to 6% of GDP becuase its currency would collapse! The U.S. is different, but still, we cannot sustain a trade deficit of this magnitude. People must understand that when we buy an item from say China, we pay in dollars. The Chinese company we just bought from them goes to an Exchange Bank in China and converts those dollars to Yuan. The Chinese banking system (Chinese Government) is now sitting on those dollars. They can either 1, buy oil, 2, buy Treasuries, 3. buy U.S goods, 4. buy U.S. Corporations, 5. other. Over time if we (the U.S. ) continue to run a trade deficit we could simply be completely bought and controlled by foreigners. Warren Buffet has explained the situation as being like a rich Texas farmer who loses a small piece of his land year after year and never notices for a while. When he then notices, tragedy sets in because he no longer controls his land. So in sum, we need to get the trade deficit way down. This is why the Fed has abandoned the dollar. It wil be going down for the next 20 years. That is how long it is going to take to correct this imbalance mess.