Don't believe IPR hype
Taiwan would be shooting itself in the foot if it were to go down the American route of ever-broader and stronger intellectual property protection, as suggested by Honigmann Hong and Lu Yi-hsun ("IPR should drive our tech-based economy," page 8, Tuesday, Aug. 10).
In the US this approach is beginning to be questioned -- last autumn the US Federal Trade Commission produced a report suggesting that the extension of patent protection in the US to cover software and business methods has been a failure. The report suggests what most software developers and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) know already -- that innovation in IT is driven by competition, not by patentability, and that patents actually impede development in that field.
Clearly, then, it spectacularly fails Hong and Lu's test to "find an equilibrium between technological development and technological dissemination."
The article says that IBM collected "over US$1 billion" in license fees for its patents in 2001. But it misses the fact that the great majority of these patents are on programming methods that IT professionals regard as trivial -- ideas that would occur naturally to them and which certainly were not the result of expensive and time-consuming research. For example, one of IBM's patents is on the idea of marking text in a word-processor in different colors for correcting. As well as IBM, Microsoft uses patents to bully potential competitors; indeed Microsoft has openly stated its intention to use the patent system to drive Linux out of the software market.
Other patents are held by companies whose sole business is litigating over patents. Currently, Web sites are being threatened by Acacia,which holds a patent on the principle of playing music and movies directly on the Web. Another company, E-Data, is suing (legal) online music download services over its patent on downloading data on the Internet. A British company, the "British Technology Group," is now suing Microsoft and Apple over its patent on downloading software updates from the Internet. Yet another company, Divine, has extracted license fees from "e-retailers" over its patent on selling things over the Internet.
It is important to remember that these firms contributed nothing to the innovations to which they claim exclusive ownership. Instead they are playing the patent system like a lottery, patenting obvious ideas in the hope that they will become widely used.
Such is the nature of software "licensing" patents, or, as it is better characterized, legalized extortion. As US economics professor Brian Kahin notes in his essay called "Information Process Patents in the US and Europe," "The licensing market [for software patents], such as it is, seems to be characterized by patentees looking for infringers, rather than productive companies looking for technology."
It should be no surprise that there is great resistance within the EU to proposals to adopt an American-style patenting regime on new technologies there. If patents such as those mentioned above were to be made legally valid in the EU or Taiwan, the result would be a net outflow of license fees to the US and Japan, where most new technology patents are held. These "license fees" are money which would otherwise be spent on developing new innovative products.
Software and media piracy is undoubtedly a serious problem in Taiwan, albeit completely unrelated to patents. But adopting a US-style copyright regime, and in particular laws such as the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act, is not the solution. This law outlaws many ordinary consumer practices, and makes criminals out of ordinary honest citizens -- but would do nothing to prevent piracy. For example, the US law makes it illegal for consumers to try to bypass region-locks on legitimately-purchased DVDs.
There is no copyright law anywhere in the world which makes it illegal to play a movie legitimately purchased in another country, at least for one's personal entertainment. By making it illegal to bypass any technology designed to control access to content, this law overrides all safeguards in copyright law. Clearly it is not intended to stop piracy, but instead to enshrine the business models of the American movie studios. It is not in Taiwan's best interests, therefore, that this law be adopted here.
Taiwan should continue to be a nation built on innovation, rather than try to play the intellectual property litigation game of the US and Japan -- a game which it is sure to lose.
Alex Macfie
Taipei County
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS