Tag Archives: Intellectual Property

Trade Wars Just Getting Started, by James Rickards

Neither China nor the US can really give up much in their trade dispute, which means it could last many years. From James Rickards at dailyreckoning.com:

Markets are eagerly awaiting the conclusion of the so-called “phase one” trade deal between the U.S. and China.

Both parties are trying to reach a mini-deal involving simple tariff reductions and a truce on new tariffs along with Chinese purchases of pork and soybeans from the U.S.

The likely success or failure of the mini-deal has been a main driver of stock market action for the past year. When the deal looks likely, markets rally. When the deal looks shaky, markets fall.

A deal is still possible. But investors should be prepared for a shocking fall in stock market valuations if it does not. Markets have fully discounted a successful phase one, so there’s not much upside if it happens.

On the other hand, if phase one falls apart stock markets will hit an air pocket and fall 5% or more in a matter of days.

But even if the phase one deal goes through, it does not end the trade wars. Unresolved issues include tariffs, subsidies, theft of intellectual property, forced transfer of technology, closed markets, unfair competition, cyber-espionage and more.

Most of the issues will not be resolved quickly, if ever.

Continue reading

Trump’s Impossible Fight to Stop Theft of Ideas, by Mike “Mish” Shedlock

The inability to wall off intellectual property may not be all bad. From Mike “Mish” Shedlock at moneymaven.io:

Trump is on a mission to stop China from stealing US IP. It’s not possible, but what if it was?

Assume we could stop 100% of IP theft by “free riders” who improve the product and pass it off as their own.

Would we want to?

Nicholas Gruen, CEO of Lateral Economics, says We’re All Free Riders. Get over It!

The free rider problem is real enough. If it costs vast sums to test a new drug, we can’t expect the market to do so if all that investment can be undercut by imitators. But here’s the thing. In addition to the free rider problem, which we should solve as best we can, there’s a free rider opportunity.

The American economist Robert Solow demonstrated in the 1950s that nearly all of the productivity growth in history – particularly our rise from subsistence to affluence since the industrial revolution – was a result not of increasing capital investment, but of people finding better ways of working and playing, and then being copied.

If, as a society today, we had to choose between addressing the free rider problem and seizing the free rider opportunity, taking the latter option wins hands down.

Continue reading

Wall Street Journal Admits “China Started The Trade War, Not Trump”, by Tyler Durden

America has been justifiably frustrated by China’s one-way trade policies and complete disregard for intellectual property rights for many years. From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

If there’s a trade war between the U.S. and China, don’t blame Donald Trump, says The Wall Street Journal’s Greg Ip: China started it long before he became president.

While definitely not toeing the line of the mainstream media’s ubiquitous ‘Trump is an idiot’ narrative, Ip explains below that, if they’re honest with themselves, even free traders and internationalists agree China’s predatory trade practices – which include forcing U.S. business to transfer valuable technology to Chinese firms and restricting access to Chinese markets – are undermining both its partners and the trading system.

Mr. Trump’s China crackdown is risky, but it’s on firmer legal, political and economic ground than many of his other trade complaints, for several reasons.

1. These products are different: The classic case for free trade predicts that each country specializes where it has a comparative advantage, lowering costs and raising incomes for everyone. If China subsidizes exports of steel to the U.S., in theory the U.S. still benefits because consumers and steel-using industries will have lower costs, and while some steel jobs will disappear, more productive jobs elsewhere will take their place.

But starting in the 1980s, economists recognized that comparative advantage couldn’t explain success in many industries such as commercial jetliners, microprocessors and software. These industries are difficult for competitors to enter because of steep costs for research and development, previously established technical standards, increasing returns to scale (costs drop the more you sell), and network effects (the more customers use the product, the more valuable it becomes).

In such industries, a handful of firms may reap the lion’s share of the wages and profits (what economists call rents), at the expense of others. China’s efforts are aimed at achieving such dominance in many of these industries by 2025.

“China is undermining or taking away some of our rents, so we are relatively worse off and they are better off,” says Douglas Irwin, author of “Clashing over Commerce: A History of U.S. Trade Policy.” Unlike Mr. Trump’s tariffs on steel and aluminum, “a lot of economists would hold their fire in terms of attacking Trump for his China actions. I don’t think anyone can really defend the way China has moved in the past few years, violating intellectual property and forced technology transfer.”

To continue reading: Wall Street Journal Admits “China Started The Trade War, Not Trump”

LEAKED: Trump’s Next Shoe to Drop on US-China Trade, by Wolf Richter

Intellectual property theft is rampant in China, and the Trump administration may be preparing a series of punitive measures. The effects would dwarf the repercussions of the steel and aluminum tariffs. From Wolf Richter at wolfstreet.com:

This is the big one. It makes steel and aluminum tariffs look like a game.

If this is true – it was leaked by a “source familiar with international trade” to the Nikkei Asian Review and isn’t based on a White House announcement – then it’s going to add a lot of fuel to the already heated trade dispute between the US and China, and may ultimately make the steel and aluminum tariffs look like a game.

To punish China for its intellectual property theft, including IP infringements such as counterfeiting, and to retaliate against Chinese investment rules that require technology transfers to Chinese partners in order to set up shop in China, the Trump administration is considering a proposal by the Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) that would impose:

  • Tariffs on a large variety of Chinese products, including tech products and consumer goods like clothing.
  • Restrictions on investment by Chinese companies in the US, the first impact of which we have already seen by Trump’s order yesterday blocking all Chinese takeovers of large US tech companies.
  • And limits on visas for certain Chinese nationals.

The USTR also urged US allies, including Japan, to implement similar measures and synchronize their policies, according to the “source familiar with international trade,” cited by the Nikkei Asian Review.

Germany, Japan, and other countries have long fumed over the required technology transfers to Chinese partners. At the same time, Chinese companies, often state-owned, have been on a shopping spree in Germany, going after robotics know-how and other industries, which has caused a lot of soul-searching in the business community in Germany. Japan too “has long opposed China’s intellectual property practices,” as the Nikkei put it. Now the USTR has asked these countries to do something about it.

To continue reading: LEAKED: Trump’s Next Shoe to Drop on US-China Trade