A former anti-counterfeiting activist told The Epoch Times that the Chinese regime’s recent campaign against activists engaged in exposing fake or substandard goods was aimed partly at shielding businesses with ties to local officials.
Chinese authorities detained scores of activists across more than 20 provinces in August, according to a Nov. 7 article on Chinese media platform Sohu.
The former activist, who operated in Shenzhen for years, said the campaign was conducted under the banner of China’s anti-organized-crime drive.
The man, identified by the pseudonym Lin Tao out of fear of reprisal, said professional anti-counterfeiting activists typically purchase products suspected of violating quality or regulatory standards, and then seek compensation via lawsuits or complaints to government regulators.
Their claims are based on existing consumer protection laws and product testing results, he said, and are not baseless threats or illegal demands for money.
The article on Sohu stated that regime authorities detained activists across more than 20 provinces and regions in August. More than 100 detention notices were publicly available, although the regime had not disclosed the total number of people detained.
Some detainees were released on bail or freed between late September and the end of October, with authorities citing insufficient evidence, the need for further investigation, or relatively minor offenses, according to the article.
The clampdown has raised questions about whether the regime is treating consumers who deliberately purchase suspected defective or noncompliant products to seek compensation as exercising legal rights or committing extortion against businesses.
Legal Claims and Regulatory Leaks
Lin noted that China’s Consumer Rights Protection Law allows consumers to seek refunds and compensation equal to three times the purchase price when businesses engage in fraudulent practices. Separate provisions governing food and pharmaceutical products can provide compensation of up to 10 times the purchase price in qualifying cases.
Lin said activists pursue claims through official complaints and court proceedings, but their scrutiny has increasingly been treated as criminal activity.
“Now the authorities have included professional anti-counterfeiting work in the scope of their campaign to eliminate organized crime,” he said.
One of his most troubling experiences involved the alleged leaking of complaint materials to businesses under investigation by government agencies.
Lin said he once filed a complaint with the Shanghai Municipal Petitions Bureau against a popular reading app. The company learned about the complaint the following day and contacted him to negotiate a settlement.
“Even a municipal-level petitions agency in Shanghai leaks whistleblowers’ materials, let alone those smaller localities,” he said.
Lin said such incidents exposed serious weaknesses in protections for whistleblowers and suggested that some local officials might alert businesses that have connections with them to new complaints.
“If you report a business and it has connections there, even if you have evidence of violations, there’s nothing you can do. The local government will protect it,” he said.
As a result, private settlements became common. Lin estimated that about 70 percent of the cases he handled ended in settlements, with compensation often amounting to only about 30 percent of what claimants might have obtained under the law.
Court proceedings also became increasingly difficult. Lin said that since 2021, courts have become less willing to award compensation when activists purchase large quantities of a product, sometimes ruling that they do not qualify as ordinary consumers.
This shift has pushed some activists toward administrative complaints or private negotiations instead of litigation.
Growing Risks for Consumer Rights Activists
Lin previously established a company specializing in anti-counterfeiting work. His cases covered a wide range of issues, including food safety, cosmetics, misleading advertising, and intellectual property violations. He also pursued lawsuits involving misleading ads endorsed by celebrities.
His work included investigating food products with expired production standards, inaccurate nutritional labels, and potentially excessive or illegal additives. Suspected violations involving product ingredients could be sent for laboratory testing before legal action was taken.
However, Lin said the risks of the profession increased substantially in recent years. He completed his remaining cases and left China in June 2024, ending his anti-counterfeiting business.
He believes that the campaign is not simply about maintaining market order but also about protecting businesses that contribute significantly to local economies through taxes and employment.
Local governments increasingly depend on corporate tax revenue, he said, making them reluctant to take action against businesses that could be important sources of local income.
Recent official actions have reinforced concerns about the expanding scope of the clampdown.
In August, a Chinese online personality known as Song Ge Da Hu, who had nearly a million social media followers and repeatedly exposed food fraud, was accused by Changchun police of being the head of an alleged organized criminal group, according to another article on Sohu that cited a police statement. More than 20 members of his team were arrested, according to the statement.
The Fuyang Municipal Market Supervision Administration in Anhui Province recently listed what it called malicious compensation claims among potential indicators of new organized crime activities, according to Chinese state media Beijing News.
In May, China’s Cyberspace Administration also announced an initiative targeting four categories of online misconduct in August, three of which involved businesses, including the alleged malicious amplification of negative information about companies, defamation, and infringement of entrepreneurs’ personal rights.
Lin said that while the regime clamps down on consumer rights activists, it does not strengthen its oversight of problematic products to protect consumers. Problems involving food additives, cosmetics quality, and misleading advertising remain widespread in China after he shut down his business, he said.
Prominent Activist Leaves China
Lin’s departure follows that of Wang Hai, widely described as China’s pioneering consumer rights activist, who has also left the country.
In a blog post on Oct. 28, Wang detailed the circumstances surrounding his departure.
The article states that Wang had helped cherry growers in Dalian, Liaoning Province, seek compensation after they allegedly suffered losses from counterfeit pesticides and fertilizers.
In September, police detained several farmers, a human rights lawyer, citizen journalists, Wang’s assistant, the head of his laboratory, and more than 20 employees on suspicion of “picking quarrels and provoking trouble,” a broadly worded criminal charge frequently used against the regime’s critics and activists, according to Wang’s account.
Wang said he suspected the arrests were retaliation by business interests affected by the consumer protection campaign.
He said that in late August, he learned that four private e-commerce companies had allegedly pooled 100 million yuan ($15 million) to target him and his team. He subsequently left China.
U.S.-based China current affairs commentator Yue Shan told The Epoch Times that political campaigns against particular groups or individuals in China often have deeper motivations.
He warned that targeting anti-counterfeiting commentators could create a chilling effect, discouraging others from exposing misconduct and defending consumer rights.
Li Jing and Gu Xiaohua contributed to this report.
