> The issue is that IP is a legal creation, so it can only be stolen if it is recognized in the first place
The same is true of all crimes, they are all legal creations. And from what I can tell, China has the concept of IP. They're protective of their own, for example.
It sounds, then, like you're now agreeing that the IP is being ignored, just saying it's okay because China don't want to recognize it.
If not, I will ask again:
Suppose we have 2 IP owners, and 1 has their IP ignored by China and copied, the other has their IP "considered a different standard/not recognized" by China and copied.
_What differences do the two IP owners experience?_
This is the key question I asked before, and I am asking now. What's the difference for the IP owner? I ask because it seems like you're playing with words, not substance.
I'm not sure what you are trying to argue. US law is not the same thing as international law. Of course US law, including IP standards, will not necessarily be recognized outside the US unless part of a treaty. It's similar to how the US doesn't recognize mainland China's claim over Taiwan.
That said, there are treaties covering IP that both the US and China are a party to which require certain mutual recognition. The US has sued China in the WTO for violating the IP provisions, but has not won most of those cases (AFAIK).
US companies can also sue Chinese companies in China for IP infringement and some of those cases have been won. Chinese courts tend to award much more limited damages than US courts, so US companies don't find this satisfactory. But again, that is a difference of law.
I'm not arguing anything, I'm asking you a simple question. I'm not sure why you are trying to avoid answering. Here is that question again, I highlighted it below:
Suppose we have 2 different IP owners. 1 has their IP ignored by China and copied, and the other has their IP "considered a different standard/not recognized" by China and copied.
---> _What differences do the two IP owners experience?_ <---
You are trying to argue that "not recognizing" IP and thus ignoring it, or "having different standards for IP" that lets you ignore it, is somehow different from just ignoring it. You have not explained how that makes a difference in outcome. Why should business owners care what excuse is given for ignoring IP? If it wasn't one excuse, it would be another, and ignored is ignored.
The difference between the two cases you outlined is that if a US business has its IP copied by a Chinese business and that IP is recognized in China then the US company can sue the Chinese company in China for damages resulting from infringement.
If there is no mutual recognition then the US business must sue in the US, and the judgement may not be recognized in China, making it difficult for the US business to collect.
The other difference is that if IP is recognized in both the US and China as a matter of treaty (like the WTO or Berne Convention) and a Chinese company copies the IP of a US company then the US can sue China in the WTO to enforce compliance.
The same is true of all crimes, they are all legal creations. And from what I can tell, China has the concept of IP. They're protective of their own, for example.
It sounds, then, like you're now agreeing that the IP is being ignored, just saying it's okay because China don't want to recognize it.
If not, I will ask again:
Suppose we have 2 IP owners, and 1 has their IP ignored by China and copied, the other has their IP "considered a different standard/not recognized" by China and copied.
_What differences do the two IP owners experience?_
This is the key question I asked before, and I am asking now. What's the difference for the IP owner? I ask because it seems like you're playing with words, not substance.