[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 67 (Tuesday, May 14, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5001-S5002]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS

  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, I come to the floor this afternoon to very 
briefly follow up on a rather lengthy statement I made on May 3 
regarding the present intellectual property rights dispute with the 
People's Republic of China. Since then, I have read a number of reports 
in the Chinese media regarding their view of the present situation 
which I feel bear examination and call for some response.
  First, I am struck by the fact that the Chinese Government's position 
on its level of compliance with the IPR agreement appears to be 
somewhat schizophrenic. On the one hand, I have seen statements from 
both the Foreign Ministry and Ministry of Foreign Trade and Economic 
Cooperation stating, for example, that ``the Chinese side has fully and 
conscientiously carried out its duties as stipulated in [the] Sino-U.S. 
IPR Agreement.'' On the other hand, I have also read statements from 
the same spokesmen for the same ministries tacitly acknowledging that 
China has not adhered to the letter of the agreement but falling back 
on the excuse that ``demanding that a developing country such as China 
do a perfect job [in regards to enforcing the terms of the Agreement] 
within a short few years is not practical as well as unfair.''
  Well Mr. President, which is it? I, and most other observers I 
believe, would credit the latter as being closer to the truth. Starting 
from that premise, I would remind the Chinese that we are not asking 
that they do a perfect job of rooting out IPR piracy. We are simply 
asking that they adhere to an agreement that they signed; we are simply 
asking that they live up to their voluntarily assumed responsibilities. 
If, as the Chinese assert, it is unfair for us to assume that they can 
try to stem IPR piracy in only a few years, then why on Earth did they 
sign the agreement to do so in the first place? How can it be unfair to 
hold the Chinese to their own word?
  It is sort of like two ranchers who sign a contract, one agreeing to 
buy 10 head of cattle from another. The buyer takes the 10 head, but 
gives the seller only one-third of the agreed-on payment. When the 
seller complains, the buyer says that it's unfair to blame him for not 
living up to the agreement in full because he doesn't have enough money 
to pay for all 10 head. Well, the buyer knew going into the deal that 
he couldn't live up to his side of the agreement, but went ahead in 
spite of that and signed it anyway. So who is the guilty party, Mr. 
President, certainly not the aggrieved seller.
  Second, the Chinese have repeatedly stated that they are opposed to 
our imposition of sanctions because economic and trade disputes 
``should be settled through consultations in the spirit of mutual 
respect, equality, and mutual benefit.'' Well Mr. President, we have 
tried consultations, only to have the Chinese side continually promise 
adherence but fail to carry through. As the Chinese are so fond of 
saying, ``deeds speak louder than words''; and their deeds clearly show 
that they are not living up to the agreement. We

[[Page S5002]]

have tried mutual respect, but there is no mutual respect when one side 
systematically fails to live up to an agreement. We have tried mutual 
benefit, but there is no mutual benefit when IPR piracy in the People's 
Republic of China costs United States' companies in excess of $2 
billion in lost revenue per year.
  Third, as I noted in my last statement, I have noticed a tendency on 
the part of some Chinese officials when faced with statements regarding 
the lack of Chinese adherence to the agreement to attempt to deflect 
the criticism by taking the offensive and claiming that the United 
States has not held up its side of the agreement. Unfortunately, Mr. 
President, when pressed for specific examples of that alleged 
noncompliance, my Chinese friends have grown somewhat vague and 
noncommittal.
  Mr. President, as the two sides continue 11-hour talks on this 
impasse, I hope that the Chinese side will remember that it is the 
United States, and not them, that is the aggrieved party.

                          ____________________