54 ms·

China blocks Wikimedia from entering World Intellectual Property Organization

520 points by hardmaru 5y ago

Proven 5y ago
The world's largest thief of intellectual property blocks an applicant that permits free copying of their intellectual property.
MidnightRaver 5y ago
Lol who accepted China into an IP organization : D
hardmaru 5y ago
Full title (before shortening to <= 80 characters): "China again blocks Wikimedia Foundation’s accreditation to World Intellectual Property Organization"
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
tuberelay 5y ago
China corrupts any global organization it touches.
- fouric 5y ago
  I can think of the WHO, John Cena's Twitter apology, Blizzard, the NBA, and Apple, but what else is there?
  - boba-men 5y ago
    You make it sounds like that's not enough? WHO in of itself would be extremely troubling. And its not just Apple, MANY fortune 500 companies have agreed to comply with authoritarian policies to do business in China.
    - fouric 5y ago
      My apologies, I was being a little bit tongue-in-cheek (which didn't come through as clearly as I hoped) while also genuinely soliciting more items for my list.
  - midasuni 5y ago
    Aqueducts?
  - adventured 5y ago
    Hollywood - the movie industry more broadly - is also mostly gone now. They're all cowards, terrified of doing or saying anything critical of China (for exactly the same reason the NBA is, fear of losing the China market). They should be at the forefront of being critical of an illiberal superpower, given their supposed ideological leanings as an industry. Instead they're hiding in the back of the room, they'll be the last to say anything.
    - lelandfe 5y ago
      I don’t think this should surprise anyone. Hollywood has no ideological anything beyond “make more money,” and for some franchises China is not just a market - it’s the market. The Transformers series especially wound up being money printing machines in China. Even overlooking the pressure China doubtlessly applies to Hollywood, the execs greenlighting scripts would have to start hating money to approve anything that jeopardizes revenue from Chinese theaters.
  - voldacar 5y ago
    Superhero movies, and hollywood in general
- matheusmoreira 5y ago
  Yup. Supposedly free american companies are forced to bow down to authoritarian chinese government demands because they can't afford to lose that market. The wonders of globalization. Imagine what China is gonna do to Apple now that on-device wrongthink scanning is a thing.
  - pessimizer 5y ago
    > on-device wrongthink scanning is a thing. Yes, it's horrifying how the authoritarian Chinese government forced this.
- ben_w 5y ago
  Global organisations are to nations what words are to individual humans, both in capability and purpose: they get used, not corrupted, by government action. Actual corruption can still happen by individuals within organisations, but that (continuing the metaphor) is like coughing or stammering while you talk, and isn’t desired even by the user.
- wolverine876 5y ago
  > China corrupts any global organization it touches. International inter-governmental organizations have always had members like China. That is the environment they are built for and function in, like the current, waves, and wind for a ship at sea. The U.S.'s reputation isn't so hot, throwing it's weight around and under Trump and to a lesser degree, GW Bush, actively trying to undermine those organizations. Even the international postal organization was a target.
FatalLogic 5y ago
Analysis and explanation (from 2020, but the issues are unchanged): https://qz.com/1908836/china-blocks-wikimedia-from-un-agency-wipo-over-taiwan-dispute/ https://qz.com/1908836/china-blocks-wikimedia-from-un-agency... Creative Commons comment on the most recent blocking: "As in 2020, China’s statement falsely suggested that the Wikimedia Foundation was spreading disinformation via the independent, volunteer-led Wikimedia Taiwan chapter"[0] [0] https://creativecommons.org/2021/10/06/creative-commons-response-to-wikimedia-foundations-wipo-observer-application-being-blocked/ https://creativecommons.org/2021/10/06/creative-commons-resp...
- andyxor 5y ago
  not a fan of China government but in this case I tend to believe them, I've seen Wikipedia volunteers spread actual disinformation in a concerted effort especially on politically charged topics.
  - michaelsbradley 5y ago
    downvoted for lack of evidence/examples.
    - andyxor 5y ago
      well pick any American politician right of center and check their wikipedia page.
      - michaelsbradley 5y ago
        please give an example with quote/s, link/s, and your summary analysis.
        deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
      - krageon 5y ago
        Every US politician that anyone would actually know is extreme right, so this is a very big group. Not a very useful classification, you may as well have said "any US politician". Then we get to the point where it is unclear what your actual problem is with their wikipedia pages. The only thing that can be concluded is that you apparently believe the wikipedia page of every US politician is somehow anomalous. It tells us nothing.
cscurmudgeon 5y ago
One can connect the dots between this, this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Struggle_session https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Struggle_session and rampant cancel culture now prevalent in the US. Let this article connect some of those dots: https://www.wsj.com/articles/get-ready-for-the-struggle-session-11552003346 https://www.wsj.com/articles/get-ready-for-the-struggle-sess... And just on today's front page: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28817721 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28817721 https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/10/why-latest-campus-cancellation-different/620352/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/10/why-latest...
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- jjulius 5y ago
  I would be very curious to see how you would connect those dots. Do go on...
  - cscurmudgeon 5y ago
    Here you go: https://www.wsj.com/articles/get-ready-for-the-struggle-session-11552003346 https://www.wsj.com/articles/get-ready-for-the-struggle-sess... You are welcome. Edit: Parent comment edited. See that.
    - jjulius 5y ago
      Given that HN tries to foster discussion, I was hoping that "you would". You know, in your own words. Surely if you feel strongly enough about something, you'd be capable of discussing your viewpoint instead of just dropping a few links at random.
      - aww_dang 5y ago
        Maybe try asking more pointed questions?
    - 5y ago
twofornone 5y ago
My only surprise is that China hasn't mentioned the rabidly biased cabal of editors that gatekeep any remotely political article and bully any "non-pc" editors off the platform. Probably because the divisiveness is useful to China's rise, and it wouldn't surprise me if they are behind some of the editing. It's kind of offensive that wikipedia still has an image of neutrality when the entrenched activist editors refuse to acknowledge the perspective of ≈50% of the country (if turnout from the last two elections is a valid measure of US political alignment).
- aww_dang 5y ago
  Wikipedia has always felt like a walled garden for certain topics. The crowd sourcing is a nice window dressing for an end product which can be highly partisan where it matters. That said, I think you would do well to distinguish between the CCP and China the nation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Per...
  - Supermancho 5y ago
    > I think you would do well to distinguish between the CCP and China the nation. Why is that? Granted, the people of China individually work within the gaps of totalitarian control. Ok. The country of (historic and modern) China is whatever the CCP leadership dictates.
    - aww_dang 5y ago
      Individuals are not the collective. Not only is it inaccurate as a generalization, but it personifies the collective. A nation state is an abstract concept. Politicians and leaders act. Individuals may agree or disagree. Abstractions have no agency. This is most apparent for me in the false narrative of, "China lifted a billion people out of poverty". Unpack that one. This advancement is relative to a largely agrarian society which was then subjected to the Great Leap Forward. Loosening your grip on the victim's neck isn't the same as performing the Heimlich maneuver. China, the nation advanced economically. Business people worked together to develop an economy. These individuals are the real heroes, not the state. They prevailed despite government regulations, corruption and central planning. Going back to the propaganda narrative, how much better off would the people of China be if they were not under the yoke of the CCP? From there it is not only easy to see how this narrative is inaccurate, but a toxic mistruth in service of authoritarians. The distinction is important. https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2012-mapping-chinas-red-nobility/ https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2012-mapping-chinas-red-n...
beaunative 5y ago
I don't think China has grudge against Wikimedia specifically, the official policy of theirs has always been that if you recognize Taiwan, you are no friend of them. I don't think the Chinese delegate there cares about free knowledge, further it's their job literally to say no to Taiwan recongition anywhere on earth. So why should we be surprised that China does this when the United States federal government don't call their Taiwan ambassador ambassador, but rather director of the American Institute in Taiwan, out of respect of the same policy.
- fouric 5y ago
  I don't think that that makes it any better. Actually, it seems worse that the CCP would act to obstruct an organization (ostensibly) devoted to the dissemination of knowledge simply because they recognize Taiwan as a country than if they had a particular grudge against The Wikipedia Foundation in particular.
- 1ris 5y ago
  First of all, no private organisation can "recognize" a state. That is a privilege for states. Private organisations can only boycott (non-)states by not doing any business with said (non-)citizens. Why in the world Wikimedia do that, and how? Second, this policy by china is the problem. Not the lack of obedience by the rest of the world.
  - juliangamble 5y ago
    Look at which airlines have “Chinese Taipei” vs plain old “Taipei”. (Malaysian airlines is not intimidated.) Corporations can and do recognise a state.
  - beaunative 5y ago
    well, i'm talking about recognition as the Chinese state understand it, of course no private organization can "recognize" a state in an official, diplomatic capacity, that's hardly the focal point of my statement. let me know if you have a better word for it. alright.
  - refenestrator 5y ago
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
viktorcode 5y ago
Nobody seems to notice that it should not matter at all how accurate exactly the information Wikimedia contains, because it has no relation to the role they can fulfil at WIPO. China blocks the application, citing irrelevant info. Then other countries dismiss those irrelevant accusations as false. It seems the future of WIPO is to become irrelevant UN body.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- matheusmoreira 5y ago
  > It seems the future of WIPO is to become irrelevant UN body. I certainly hope so!
  - hilbert42 5y ago
    I can't agree more.
- fennecfoxen 5y ago
  China does this across the whole UN. You can’t bring your high school club to visit without appeasing the censors, who will check that the school and its clubs have never blogged mentioning Taiwan as anything other than a “province of China.” China is on the security council so this will never change. The UN will implode first. https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/china-makes-sure-everyone-writes-taiwans-name-just-soeven-a-colorado-high-school-11631304386 https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/china-makes-sure-everyone-w...
  - int_19h 5y ago
    To be fair, this is just one of the many examples of UNSC being broken by design. In a similar vein, US tends to use its veto indiscriminately to cover up for Israel, and Russia does the same for its client states and allies.
    - ethbr0 5y ago
perihelions 5y ago
Of course Wikimedia won't take any action to appease this totalitarian nonsense. But, most for-profit companies do exactly that. When was the last time any Hollywood movie or mainstream entertainment mentioned Taiwanese conflict? When do you last remember seeing "Free Tibet"? Or any Tibet? Chinese film censors can apply billions of dollars of pressure, simply to change a single word. Who can withstand that? Wikimedia is just one small pebble in this river. Soft propaganda is going to rewrite how the world perceives the sinosphere, more thoroughly and more profoundly than any Winstons rectifying Wikipedia. I don't think we have any meaningful models to understand what's going on right now -- there's not really much precedent in history or even in fiction.
- cryptonitez 5y ago
  It would really be fun to make a movie about overthrowing the CCP, could be uplifting.
  - wolverine876 5y ago
    It's pretty shocking that there isn't such a movie - or any movie with the CCP as the baddie - and I haven't heard someone propose it before.
    - bombcar 5y ago
      This article explains exactly why - all companies involved would get blackballed by China and lose that lucrative market.
    - iszomer 5y ago
      Try Spy Game starring Robert Redford and Brad Pitt.
- vmception 5y ago
  The best model would be the time period from 1910 to 1950 where the US Supreme Court had ruled that motion pictures had no 1st amendment protection. This let states censor and dictate at the same level that China is doing right now. Productions that wanted access to the entire US market bent to the most restrictive state’s demands. Did some states occasionally pay to incentivize compliance? Don’t know about that, but the function is largely the same.
stjohnswarts 5y ago
They don't like the idea of free information and open discussion. I can why they blocked it.
71a54xd 5y ago
The notion of China posturing to defend / support the idea of intellectual property is patently hilarious. Obviously, the core of this is not appeasing to Chinese / CCP censors but the headline is funny nonetheless.
- pbhjpbhj 5y ago
  [This post represents my private opinions and is unrelated to my employment.] It seems like you're trying to be flippantly dismissive, or to just make a joke, but the intent of your 'joke' isn't clear at all. What are you trying to intimate? Chinese companies gain millions of patents each year, in China and elsewhere, so China defending IPR as a concept seems wise. They seem to use a lot of utility patents (I think the USA equivalent is the 'design patent', it covers a product rather than an invention per se). China as a nominally formerly communist state it makes sense that IPR would be weak in Chinese law [there's a lot to be said on whether the Chinese progress with, for example, 6G phone tech has been accelerated by that approach - which might indicate that the West has things locked down too much and stifles innovation somewhat??]; just like how the full power of IPR goes to the richest companies in USA because of their strong capitalism. China is changing, and whilst they may not enforce IPR in the way many Western Capitalist countries do Chinese organisations still use patents heavily. Indeed the Chinese government have schemes to encourage acquisition of foreign patents. So, yeah, not sure where you're going with that?
  - drsnow 5y ago
    It's hilarious because China regularly steals trade secrets and intellectual property from any, primarily American, company they desire.
    - 71a54xd 5y ago
      Did you catch the pun?
  - 71a54xd 5y ago
    This is the most HN "diss" response I've gotten in years and I genuinely enjoyed it. You missed the point so far while trying to sound intellectual I'm absolutely floored. Thank you for the happiness this granted me today - I hope you're happy and living life to the fullest :)
mrobot 5y ago
I view political articles on Wikimedia's Wikipedia similar to how i view media sources such as Radio Free Asia. There is really nothing democratic or open about the political content you will find there. There are even seemingly obsessive accounts with thousands of edits a day that may just be government or think-tank managed accounts, reinforcing content favorable to US foreign policy goals. I see Wikipedia as kind of a good jump off point to see what the US State Dept and CIA position is on some issue, and then continue my investigation from there. If everyone googled about what is going on some part of the world, almost all would read the Wikipedia article. If the Wikipedia article differed in any major way from what the Pentagon's goals were, well... you can see how that would be a problem for the Pentagon. If you allow yourself to believe that the goals and movements of the Pentagon are not always grand, you can see how the political content there can more or less act as a weapon of war. Not really an exaggeration to say that, i really don't think... I feel like a lot of people just aren't catching on to how tightly managed US media is when it comes to "hostile" or "aggressive" actions of others, "democracy", "brutal dictators", etc. in other parts of the world. People are really still ingesting these corporate news sources with anything other than the utmost suspicion.
theHIDninja 5y ago
Anything China touches is automatically discredited.
epgui 5y ago
(Disclaimer: I'm a franco-Canadian of mixed European descent.) This article doesn't give China a great image, sure. I can think of a million criticisms to levy against China. However, I feel like a lot of the comments aren't just criticizing China, they seem to be outright anti-China. I wonder if, in the grand scheme of things, Americans/Westerners might be feeling threatened by the shift in power. I wonder if Americans/Westerners are capable of appreciating the things that China gets right, or does right. I wonder if Americans/Westerners are capable of acknowledging the things that their countries get wrong, or do wrong. I wonder if we here in the West are as fair and balanced as we tend to think. This isn't merely an academic question, I think it goes to the core of the state of mind that is required to view situations objectively (regardless of whether we might be right or wrong in any specific context). In this case, I'm totally on Wikimedia's side. But I feel like we in the West are standing right on the slippery slope of nationalism.
- ashtonkem 5y ago
  > I wonder if Americans/Westerners are capable of acknowledging the things that their countries get wrong, or do wrong. Why would you wonder that? This forum is chock full of criticism of the American government by Americans. I’ve personally levied a huge amount of it myself on this very website. In fact, I genuinely cannot imagine how you could possibly ask such a question in good faith.
  - trasz 5y ago
    It’s a valid question, given that US perpetrators never meet justice and the society isn’t even trying to do anything about it.
    - ashtonkem 5y ago
      Assuming that every American is incapable of questioning their government because entrenched systems protect the powerful is exactly the kind of thing OP was accusing others here of doing: crossing the line between criticizing the government and being anti the people.
  - 5y ago
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
jollybean 5y ago
Tibet used to be the pet project of Hollywood and US mainstream media, until they were told to shut up about it. See Google trends [1] This is a very real influence and it's pervasive due to the fat one side speaks with one, directed voice, the other there's no coordination at all: leaders of nations, provinces, universities, corporations, NGOs, uncoordinated. [1] https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=tibet https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=t...
- wolverine876 5y ago
  There's a NY Times article about the head of Disney going to China to personally apologize for a Tibet movie.
preach 5y ago
Yeah the West is screwed, but let’s not pretend we didn’t see this coming.
- mpfundstein 5y ago
  i don't agree. i believe the west is much more resilient then doomers think. the whole world is in a crisis right now, but things are rebounding. business is picking up again at super speed, people are optimistic again and close deals, new tech is being developed and deployed, climate change is finally being taken seriously, etc. etc. its the nature of democracy that people discuss and fight over things and that decision making is therefore a messy process... but we are getting there. even stuff like Polands confrontation now with the EU is part of a HEALTHY process and it speaks for the EU that all this is possible... no matter the outcome by the way, as long as indepedenent judges come to a conclusion! so stop with your predictions of doom. I bet in the long-run, China and Russia will be the one who fail.
TeeMassive 5y ago
Just the fact that China has a veto power in an intellectual property organization should be a red flag that this institution is corrupt to the core.
- stanislavb 5y ago
  Absolutely! Unfortunately, I can't see the UN getting out of this situation with China's growing influence.
TedShiller 5y ago
Is it because Wikipedia has Tiananmen Square articles?
darepublic 5y ago
Its okay wikipedia -- I still support you
sinuhe69 5y ago
It seems to me the whole concept of UNs with its permanent gatekeepers are hopelessly outdated, it should be threw out entirely. The rest of the world, exclude these gatekeepers should convene an alternative UN where the old imperialists can decide whether they want to join it as an equal member or not.

520 points by hardmaru 5y ago

The world's largest thief of intellectual property blocks an applicant that permits free copying of their intellectual property.

MidnightRaver 5y ago

Lol who accepted China into an IP organization : D

hardmaru 5y ago

Full title (before shortening to <= 80 characters): "China again blocks Wikimedia Foundation’s accreditation to World Intellectual Property Organization"

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

tuberelay 5y ago

China corrupts any global organization it touches.

fouric 5y ago
I can think of the WHO, John Cena's Twitter apology, Blizzard, the NBA, and Apple, but what else is there?
- boba-men 5y ago
  You make it sounds like that's not enough? WHO in of itself would be extremely troubling. And its not just Apple, MANY fortune 500 companies have agreed to comply with authoritarian policies to do business in China.
  - fouric 5y ago
    My apologies, I was being a little bit tongue-in-cheek (which didn't come through as clearly as I hoped) while also genuinely soliciting more items for my list.
- midasuni 5y ago
  Aqueducts?
- adventured 5y ago
  Hollywood - the movie industry more broadly - is also mostly gone now. They're all cowards, terrified of doing or saying anything critical of China (for exactly the same reason the NBA is, fear of losing the China market). They should be at the forefront of being critical of an illiberal superpower, given their supposed ideological leanings as an industry. Instead they're hiding in the back of the room, they'll be the last to say anything.
  - lelandfe 5y ago
    I don’t think this should surprise anyone. Hollywood has no ideological anything beyond “make more money,” and for some franchises China is not just a market - it’s the market. The Transformers series especially wound up being money printing machines in China. Even overlooking the pressure China doubtlessly applies to Hollywood, the execs greenlighting scripts would have to start hating money to approve anything that jeopardizes revenue from Chinese theaters.
- voldacar 5y ago
  Superhero movies, and hollywood in general
matheusmoreira 5y ago
Yup. Supposedly free american companies are forced to bow down to authoritarian chinese government demands because they can't afford to lose that market. The wonders of globalization. Imagine what China is gonna do to Apple now that on-device wrongthink scanning is a thing.
- pessimizer 5y ago
  > on-device wrongthink scanning is a thing. Yes, it's horrifying how the authoritarian Chinese government forced this.
ben_w 5y ago
Global organisations are to nations what words are to individual humans, both in capability and purpose: they get used, not corrupted, by government action. Actual corruption can still happen by individuals within organisations, but that (continuing the metaphor) is like coughing or stammering while you talk, and isn’t desired even by the user.
wolverine876 5y ago
> China corrupts any global organization it touches. International inter-governmental organizations have always had members like China. That is the environment they are built for and function in, like the current, waves, and wind for a ship at sea. The U.S.'s reputation isn't so hot, throwing it's weight around and under Trump and to a lesser degree, GW Bush, actively trying to undermine those organizations. Even the international postal organization was a target.

FatalLogic 5y ago

Analysis and explanation (from 2020, but the issues are unchanged): https://qz.com/1908836/china-blocks-wikimedia-from-un-agency-wipo-over-taiwan-dispute/ https://qz.com/1908836/china-blocks-wikimedia-from-un-agency... Creative Commons comment on the most recent blocking: "As in 2020, China’s statement falsely suggested that the Wikimedia Foundation was spreading disinformation via the independent, volunteer-led Wikimedia Taiwan chapter"[0] [0] https://creativecommons.org/2021/10/06/creative-commons-response-to-wikimedia-foundations-wipo-observer-application-being-blocked/ https://creativecommons.org/2021/10/06/creative-commons-resp...

andyxor 5y ago
not a fan of China government but in this case I tend to believe them, I've seen Wikipedia volunteers spread actual disinformation in a concerted effort especially on politically charged topics.
- michaelsbradley 5y ago
  downvoted for lack of evidence/examples.
  - andyxor 5y ago
    well pick any American politician right of center and check their wikipedia page.
    - michaelsbradley 5y ago
      please give an example with quote/s, link/s, and your summary analysis.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
    - krageon 5y ago
      Every US politician that anyone would actually know is extreme right, so this is a very big group. Not a very useful classification, you may as well have said "any US politician". Then we get to the point where it is unclear what your actual problem is with their wikipedia pages. The only thing that can be concluded is that you apparently believe the wikipedia page of every US politician is somehow anomalous. It tells us nothing.

cscurmudgeon 5y ago

One can connect the dots between this, this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Struggle_session https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Struggle_session and rampant cancel culture now prevalent in the US. Let this article connect some of those dots: https://www.wsj.com/articles/get-ready-for-the-struggle-session-11552003346 https://www.wsj.com/articles/get-ready-for-the-struggle-sess... And just on today's front page: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28817721 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28817721 https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/10/why-latest-campus-cancellation-different/620352/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/10/why-latest...

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
jjulius 5y ago
I would be very curious to see how you would connect those dots. Do go on...
- cscurmudgeon 5y ago
  Here you go: https://www.wsj.com/articles/get-ready-for-the-struggle-session-11552003346 https://www.wsj.com/articles/get-ready-for-the-struggle-sess... You are welcome. Edit: Parent comment edited. See that.
  - jjulius 5y ago
    Given that HN tries to foster discussion, I was hoping that "you would". You know, in your own words. Surely if you feel strongly enough about something, you'd be capable of discussing your viewpoint instead of just dropping a few links at random.
    - aww_dang 5y ago
      Maybe try asking more pointed questions?
  - 5y ago

twofornone 5y ago

My only surprise is that China hasn't mentioned the rabidly biased cabal of editors that gatekeep any remotely political article and bully any "non-pc" editors off the platform. Probably because the divisiveness is useful to China's rise, and it wouldn't surprise me if they are behind some of the editing. It's kind of offensive that wikipedia still has an image of neutrality when the entrenched activist editors refuse to acknowledge the perspective of ≈50% of the country (if turnout from the last two elections is a valid measure of US political alignment).

aww_dang 5y ago
Wikipedia has always felt like a walled garden for certain topics. The crowd sourcing is a nice window dressing for an end product which can be highly partisan where it matters. That said, I think you would do well to distinguish between the CCP and China the nation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Per...
- Supermancho 5y ago
  > I think you would do well to distinguish between the CCP and China the nation. Why is that? Granted, the people of China individually work within the gaps of totalitarian control. Ok. The country of (historic and modern) China is whatever the CCP leadership dictates.
  - aww_dang 5y ago
    Individuals are not the collective. Not only is it inaccurate as a generalization, but it personifies the collective. A nation state is an abstract concept. Politicians and leaders act. Individuals may agree or disagree. Abstractions have no agency. This is most apparent for me in the false narrative of, "China lifted a billion people out of poverty". Unpack that one. This advancement is relative to a largely agrarian society which was then subjected to the Great Leap Forward. Loosening your grip on the victim's neck isn't the same as performing the Heimlich maneuver. China, the nation advanced economically. Business people worked together to develop an economy. These individuals are the real heroes, not the state. They prevailed despite government regulations, corruption and central planning. Going back to the propaganda narrative, how much better off would the people of China be if they were not under the yoke of the CCP? From there it is not only easy to see how this narrative is inaccurate, but a toxic mistruth in service of authoritarians. The distinction is important. https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2012-mapping-chinas-red-nobility/ https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2012-mapping-chinas-red-n...

beaunative 5y ago

I don't think China has grudge against Wikimedia specifically, the official policy of theirs has always been that if you recognize Taiwan, you are no friend of them. I don't think the Chinese delegate there cares about free knowledge, further it's their job literally to say no to Taiwan recongition anywhere on earth. So why should we be surprised that China does this when the United States federal government don't call their Taiwan ambassador ambassador, but rather director of the American Institute in Taiwan, out of respect of the same policy.

fouric 5y ago
I don't think that that makes it any better. Actually, it seems worse that the CCP would act to obstruct an organization (ostensibly) devoted to the dissemination of knowledge simply because they recognize Taiwan as a country than if they had a particular grudge against The Wikipedia Foundation in particular.
1ris 5y ago
First of all, no private organisation can "recognize" a state. That is a privilege for states. Private organisations can only boycott (non-)states by not doing any business with said (non-)citizens. Why in the world Wikimedia do that, and how? Second, this policy by china is the problem. Not the lack of obedience by the rest of the world.
- juliangamble 5y ago
  Look at which airlines have “Chinese Taipei” vs plain old “Taipei”. (Malaysian airlines is not intimidated.) Corporations can and do recognise a state.
- beaunative 5y ago
  well, i'm talking about recognition as the Chinese state understand it, of course no private organization can "recognize" a state in an official, diplomatic capacity, that's hardly the focal point of my statement. let me know if you have a better word for it. alright.
- refenestrator 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

viktorcode 5y ago

Nobody seems to notice that it should not matter at all how accurate exactly the information Wikimedia contains, because it has no relation to the role they can fulfil at WIPO. China blocks the application, citing irrelevant info. Then other countries dismiss those irrelevant accusations as false. It seems the future of WIPO is to become irrelevant UN body.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
matheusmoreira 5y ago
> It seems the future of WIPO is to become irrelevant UN body. I certainly hope so!
- hilbert42 5y ago
  I can't agree more.
fennecfoxen 5y ago
China does this across the whole UN. You can’t bring your high school club to visit without appeasing the censors, who will check that the school and its clubs have never blogged mentioning Taiwan as anything other than a “province of China.” China is on the security council so this will never change. The UN will implode first. https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/china-makes-sure-everyone-writes-taiwans-name-just-soeven-a-colorado-high-school-11631304386 https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/china-makes-sure-everyone-w...
- int_19h 5y ago
  To be fair, this is just one of the many examples of UNSC being broken by design. In a similar vein, US tends to use its veto indiscriminately to cover up for Israel, and Russia does the same for its client states and allies.
  - ethbr0 5y ago

perihelions 5y ago

Of course Wikimedia won't take any action to appease this totalitarian nonsense. But, most for-profit companies do exactly that. When was the last time any Hollywood movie or mainstream entertainment mentioned Taiwanese conflict? When do you last remember seeing "Free Tibet"? Or any Tibet? Chinese film censors can apply billions of dollars of pressure, simply to change a single word. Who can withstand that? Wikimedia is just one small pebble in this river. Soft propaganda is going to rewrite how the world perceives the sinosphere, more thoroughly and more profoundly than any Winstons rectifying Wikipedia. I don't think we have any meaningful models to understand what's going on right now -- there's not really much precedent in history or even in fiction.

cryptonitez 5y ago
It would really be fun to make a movie about overthrowing the CCP, could be uplifting.
- wolverine876 5y ago
  It's pretty shocking that there isn't such a movie - or any movie with the CCP as the baddie - and I haven't heard someone propose it before.
  - bombcar 5y ago
    This article explains exactly why - all companies involved would get blackballed by China and lose that lucrative market.
  - iszomer 5y ago
    Try Spy Game starring Robert Redford and Brad Pitt.
vmception 5y ago
The best model would be the time period from 1910 to 1950 where the US Supreme Court had ruled that motion pictures had no 1st amendment protection. This let states censor and dictate at the same level that China is doing right now. Productions that wanted access to the entire US market bent to the most restrictive state’s demands. Did some states occasionally pay to incentivize compliance? Don’t know about that, but the function is largely the same.

stjohnswarts 5y ago

They don't like the idea of free information and open discussion. I can why they blocked it.

71a54xd 5y ago

The notion of China posturing to defend / support the idea of intellectual property is patently hilarious. Obviously, the core of this is not appeasing to Chinese / CCP censors but the headline is funny nonetheless.

pbhjpbhj 5y ago
[This post represents my private opinions and is unrelated to my employment.] It seems like you're trying to be flippantly dismissive, or to just make a joke, but the intent of your 'joke' isn't clear at all. What are you trying to intimate? Chinese companies gain millions of patents each year, in China and elsewhere, so China defending IPR as a concept seems wise. They seem to use a lot of utility patents (I think the USA equivalent is the 'design patent', it covers a product rather than an invention per se). China as a nominally formerly communist state it makes sense that IPR would be weak in Chinese law [there's a lot to be said on whether the Chinese progress with, for example, 6G phone tech has been accelerated by that approach - which might indicate that the West has things locked down too much and stifles innovation somewhat??]; just like how the full power of IPR goes to the richest companies in USA because of their strong capitalism. China is changing, and whilst they may not enforce IPR in the way many Western Capitalist countries do Chinese organisations still use patents heavily. Indeed the Chinese government have schemes to encourage acquisition of foreign patents. So, yeah, not sure where you're going with that?
- drsnow 5y ago
  It's hilarious because China regularly steals trade secrets and intellectual property from any, primarily American, company they desire.
  - 71a54xd 5y ago
    Did you catch the pun?
- 71a54xd 5y ago
  This is the most HN "diss" response I've gotten in years and I genuinely enjoyed it. You missed the point so far while trying to sound intellectual I'm absolutely floored. Thank you for the happiness this granted me today - I hope you're happy and living life to the fullest :)

mrobot 5y ago

I view political articles on Wikimedia's Wikipedia similar to how i view media sources such as Radio Free Asia. There is really nothing democratic or open about the political content you will find there. There are even seemingly obsessive accounts with thousands of edits a day that may just be government or think-tank managed accounts, reinforcing content favorable to US foreign policy goals. I see Wikipedia as kind of a good jump off point to see what the US State Dept and CIA position is on some issue, and then continue my investigation from there. If everyone googled about what is going on some part of the world, almost all would read the Wikipedia article. If the Wikipedia article differed in any major way from what the Pentagon's goals were, well... you can see how that would be a problem for the Pentagon. If you allow yourself to believe that the goals and movements of the Pentagon are not always grand, you can see how the political content there can more or less act as a weapon of war. Not really an exaggeration to say that, i really don't think... I feel like a lot of people just aren't catching on to how tightly managed US media is when it comes to "hostile" or "aggressive" actions of others, "democracy", "brutal dictators", etc. in other parts of the world. People are really still ingesting these corporate news sources with anything other than the utmost suspicion.

theHIDninja 5y ago

Anything China touches is automatically discredited.

epgui 5y ago

(Disclaimer: I'm a franco-Canadian of mixed European descent.) This article doesn't give China a great image, sure. I can think of a million criticisms to levy against China. However, I feel like a lot of the comments aren't just criticizing China, they seem to be outright anti-China. I wonder if, in the grand scheme of things, Americans/Westerners might be feeling threatened by the shift in power. I wonder if Americans/Westerners are capable of appreciating the things that China gets right, or does right. I wonder if Americans/Westerners are capable of acknowledging the things that their countries get wrong, or do wrong. I wonder if we here in the West are as fair and balanced as we tend to think. This isn't merely an academic question, I think it goes to the core of the state of mind that is required to view situations objectively (regardless of whether we might be right or wrong in any specific context). In this case, I'm totally on Wikimedia's side. But I feel like we in the West are standing right on the slippery slope of nationalism.

ashtonkem 5y ago
> I wonder if Americans/Westerners are capable of acknowledging the things that their countries get wrong, or do wrong. Why would you wonder that? This forum is chock full of criticism of the American government by Americans. I’ve personally levied a huge amount of it myself on this very website. In fact, I genuinely cannot imagine how you could possibly ask such a question in good faith.
- trasz 5y ago
  It’s a valid question, given that US perpetrators never meet justice and the society isn’t even trying to do anything about it.
  - ashtonkem 5y ago
    Assuming that every American is incapable of questioning their government because entrenched systems protect the powerful is exactly the kind of thing OP was accusing others here of doing: crossing the line between criticizing the government and being anti the people.
- 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

jollybean 5y ago

Tibet used to be the pet project of Hollywood and US mainstream media, until they were told to shut up about it. See Google trends [1] This is a very real influence and it's pervasive due to the fat one side speaks with one, directed voice, the other there's no coordination at all: leaders of nations, provinces, universities, corporations, NGOs, uncoordinated. [1] https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=tibet https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=t...

wolverine876 5y ago
There's a NY Times article about the head of Disney going to China to personally apologize for a Tibet movie.

preach 5y ago

Yeah the West is screwed, but let’s not pretend we didn’t see this coming.

mpfundstein 5y ago
i don't agree. i believe the west is much more resilient then doomers think. the whole world is in a crisis right now, but things are rebounding. business is picking up again at super speed, people are optimistic again and close deals, new tech is being developed and deployed, climate change is finally being taken seriously, etc. etc. its the nature of democracy that people discuss and fight over things and that decision making is therefore a messy process... but we are getting there. even stuff like Polands confrontation now with the EU is part of a HEALTHY process and it speaks for the EU that all this is possible... no matter the outcome by the way, as long as indepedenent judges come to a conclusion! so stop with your predictions of doom. I bet in the long-run, China and Russia will be the one who fail.

TeeMassive 5y ago

Just the fact that China has a veto power in an intellectual property organization should be a red flag that this institution is corrupt to the core.

stanislavb 5y ago
Absolutely! Unfortunately, I can't see the UN getting out of this situation with China's growing influence.

TedShiller 5y ago

Is it because Wikipedia has Tiananmen Square articles?

darepublic 5y ago

Its okay wikipedia -- I still support you

sinuhe69 5y ago

It seems to me the whole concept of UNs with its permanent gatekeepers are hopelessly outdated, it should be threw out entirely. The rest of the world, exclude these gatekeepers should convene an alternative UN where the old imperialists can decide whether they want to join it as an equal member or not.