Summary of the Main Points
This article discusses the issue of whether professional counterfeiters constitute the crime of extortion. Lawyer Cai Yaqi raises objections to the recent trend of including professional counterfeiters within the scope of "cracking down on organized crime and evil forces" and the tendency to over-convict them in several regions. He clearly distinguishes between two types of counterfeitering activities: counterfeiting that involves deliberately creating defects (such as framing businesses), which is considered extortion, and claiming compensation for genuine violations by businesses (such as selling expired food), which is not a crime. The article also reflects the complex reality of professional counterfeitering through private messages from grassroots regulators and netizens. Some counterfeiters maliciously frame businesses, while others genuinely supervise legal violations. Grassroots regulators face difficulties such as businesses being afraid to stand up for their rights, complex error tolerance mechanisms, and overwhelmed law enforcement. The public holds a one-size-fits-all attitude towards professional counterfeiters, and the root of the problem lies in the frequent illegal activities of businesses and the lack of effective regulation.
I. The Duality of Professional Counterfeiting: Legitimate Compensation ≠ Extortion
Many people think that professional counterfeiters are just trying to extort money, but there is a distinction:
- Illegal counterfeitering: For example, someone deliberately puts bugs in food or makes it spoil and then claims compensation from the business. This is fabricating facts to extort money, which is clearly extortion.
- Legal counterfeitering: If a business sells expired food or counterfeit goods, and a counterfeiter buys them and claims compensation according to the law (such as the 10-fold compensation stipulated by the Food Safety Law), even if the counterfeiter's motivation is to make a profit, it is not illegal. This is because the business violated the law first, and the consumer has the right to seek compensation; the counterfeiter should not be convicted just for wanting to make a profit.
II. The Risks of Over-Conviction in Many Regions: Don't Mistake Rights Protection for "Organized Crime"
Recently, many places have classified "complaints, reports, and claims" as "malicious claims" or even criminal acts of organized crime. The author argues that this is "wrong and dangerous":
- There are strict legal standards for conviction; one cannot convict arbitrarily (for example, treating legitimate claims as criminal acts without a legal basis). If even legitimate rights protection is suppressed, who will dare to report businesses for their violations?
- The result will be the opposite: illegal businesses will become even more arrogant, and the affected will be us consumers, with our health and wallets being at risk.
III. The Dilemmas Faced by Grassroots Regulators: Businesses Avoid Trouble, Law Enforcement Staff Are Overworked
Private messages from grassroots market regulators reveal the following challenges:
- Businesses Avoid Rights Protection: Many businesses are threatened by counterfeiters but prefer to settle out of court to avoid trouble, even keeping recordings without calling the police.
- Complicated Regulatory Mechanisms: The error tolerance and correction processes of market authorities are too complex, providing opportunities for malicious counterfeiters to exploit them (e.g., through repeated complaints and appeals that exhaust both businesses and law enforcement).
- Both Businesses and Law Enforcement Suffer: For instance, a counterfeiter may obtain hundreds of thousands from a company like Hema within half a year, leaving the company with no choice but to deal with the situation, and the law enforcement staff may even be threatened by the counterfeiter.
IV. The Root Causes of the Surge in Professional Counterfeiting: Illegal Business Practices + Lack of Regulation
Netizens point out the key reasons for the proliferation of professional counterfeiters:
- Problems with Businesses: Fake and expired goods are common in restaurants, supermarkets, and pharmacies, providing a market for counterfeiters.
- Insufficient Proactive Regulation: Regulators rarely conduct proactive inspections; they only act when reported, and their efforts are sometimes less thorough than those of chain restaurants (this is not necessarily due to negligence but may be due to a lack of personnel).
- In short, if businesses abide by the law, regulators can identify issues promptly, and there would be no need for professional counterfeiters.
V. What Should the Public Think? Don't Prejudice, Focus on the Essence
Netizens offer practical advice:
- Don't Generalize: Not all counterfeiters are malicious; some target counterfeit cigarettes and goods and receive public support (as seen in comments on social media).
- Support Vulnerable Businesses: For example, elderly shoppers who do not know how to avoid expired food should be helped, not just criticized by counterfeiters.
- Focus on Business Violations: We should address the issue at the source by regulating the production and sale of fake and expired goods, as the businesses are the ones who first break the law.
The main message of this article is to avoid a one-size-fits-all approach to professional counterfeiters. We need to distinguish between malicious acts and legitimate rights protection, and to reflect on the root causes of business violations and the lack of effective regulation to truly maintain market order.