Sharing world class knowledge from China’s #1 university ᯓ★
Hello hello!
I hope you’re all well ˗ˏˋ ♡ ˎˊ˗
It’s been a month since last update, and a month since we started our classes here at Peking University. I’d like to use this occasion to write some words about my academic experience so far.
This semester I’m completing five courses from the university’s LL.M program in Chinese Law. That means that I pretty much only study, well, Chinese law. As opposed to for example international law (which I do a tiny bit of, but not a lot). When I tell people this, I’m sometimes asked why. As in, why are you choosing to study Chinese law — in what way is that relevant for your future plans?
I don’t always know what to say to that. Admittedly, I have no concrete plans to work in or with China. But then again, who knows? Maybe I’ll join a company or an organization that sends me to one of their branches in the country. Maybe I’ll start a business with one of my many talented friends, and an opportunity arises where I can use my Chinese law-knowledge to break us into the Chinese market. Or maybe I can use what I learn about China to promote peace and international cooperation in a career that allows me to do that. That’s an old dream of mine that was recently revived during a visit at the Royal Norwegian Embassy in Beijing. I have lots of thoughts and feelings about this topic, but maybe that’s a Musing for another day.
But of course – I’ll admit I’m mostly doing this because it’s fun. Studying in Beijing is fun and interesting and a thing I can do in this season of my life so why not. With all that said, today I thought I’d write about a couple of things I’ve learnt over my first month of university here. Just in the spirit of sharing knowledge — and a little bit to test myself. Have I retained anything? Let’s see!
International Foreign Investment Law
International Foreign Investment Law is my first class of the week. Honestly? It’s only after the last class that I maybe understand what these ‘foreign investments’ even are. On a theoretical level, I guess I get it. Someone from country A invests something in something in country B. But for some reason, I just couldn’t picture it. A lot of things in the realm of economics feel a little too abstract to fully grasp for me. But now that we’ve looked at some examples, it’s starting to make more sense.
My main takeaway from this class, though, is probably the things I’ve learnt about China in general. Our professor has this blanket enthusiasm for the country that shines through a lot of the topics we talk about. She spent the better part of our first class giving us a run-down of all sorts of information about China she just thought we should know — including how rice was domesticated, the most typical Chinese poem structures, and what sort of pictures are typically found in Chinese schoolbooks. She talked about China’s natural beauty, showing us pictures of the mountains of Zhangjiajie (the ones that look like they’re from the movie Avatar), exclaiming that they’re “even more impressive than the Alps!”. Her excitement is contagious. China really is a fascinating place.
Our professor is also good at actively connecting the history of foreign investments law to the broader changes in China at the time. For instance, she’s highlighted the year 1978 as the beginning of China’s market-oriented (“socialist market!”) economy — and from there explained how the foreign investment laws of respectively 1979, 1986 and 1988 contributed to, bit by bit (or law by law), liberalize the economy. It’s also been intersting to hear about China’s entry into the World Trade Organization in 2001. She herself held a very high positions in the organization, before becoming a PKU professor. Come to think of it, most of my professors have very impressive resumés. Impressive resumés — and a genuine enthusiasm for what they teach. It’s a great combination.
Chinese Civil Procedure & Arbitration
Hmm.
I don’t have much to say about this class. A bit of a transition from Foreign Investment, hah!
It’s not that the professor or the class is bad. It’s just very theoretical. We have this phrase “material law” (at least in Norway), which means the stuff that the laws actually say. This class has very little of that. Instead, it’s about the technicalities of resolving disputes resolution. The different instances of courts, at what point you bring up evidence, things like that.
One thing I’ve learnt, though…
Actually, this is the class where I for the first time in my life used AI as a learning tool! It was helpful, but I got distracted fast:
Me:
Hello! How are you? I have a question about legal mediation in China. Do all civil cases have to undergo a mediation procedure?
ChatGPT:
Hello! I’m here to help. In China, mediation is indeed a common procedure in civil cases. According to the Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China (…)
Me:
Thanks. I also wonder how much I should listen to my heart versus my brain in matters of love and life. I believe they both are important — but how exactly should I balance the two?
ChatGPT:
It’s common to experience a conflict between our emotions and rational thoughts, especially when it comes to matters of the heart. When trying to assess your feelings, it’s important to consider both your emotions and rational thoughts, as each provides valuable insight. Here are some suggestions for navigating this internal conflict:
- Acknowledge Your Feelings: Recognize and accept the emotions you’re experiencing. Your feelings are valid and deserve to be acknowledged, even if they don’t always align with your rational thoughts. (…)
I guess that’s something I’ve learnt. In China, mediation in civil cases is common and often encouraged, but not necessarily mandatory.
Let’s move on!
International Law as Applied in China
International law is my favorite class! We’ve already had a unit on this in Bergen, but this course is pretty different. So far we’ve mostly gone through the history and sources of international law. The history bit has been very interesting — and has given me a lot to think about. Especially one question in particular. It might be a little weird, and it’s not fully thought through. But since this is my newsletter, I’ll share it anyway:
In class, we’ve been learning about how much of the early developments of international law was based on natural law. The idea that law is not created by legislators alone, but that it stems from God through ∼creation∼. One example of this idea as found in the history of international law, is the Bellum iustum doctrine, which (to my understanding) is the idea that it is sometime’s moral and righteous for a nation to go to war. But also the notion that human beings have innate value stems, at least from some of the thinkers, from the idea of creation, that they were created in God’s image. Thoughts like these lay the foundation for our modern ideas of human rights.
Nowadays, the international legal system doesn’t regard God as a source of law. But we still talk about human rights. My question is — how is the concept of human rights grounded now? I suppose we can agree on certain baseline values without bringing any deity into it. But somehow I feel like that’s not a fully satisfactory story. Could you say that ‘Human Rights’ itself has become a new natural law?
I don’t know how much of that makes sense. It’s very possible there’s a good and obvious answer to this. If you have any input, please do share! I’ve just enjoyed thinking about a great deal of the content of this course. If I ever were to become an academic, I’d like to look into stuff like this.
Chinese Intellectual Property Law
Intellectual Property is another course I enjoy a lot. Of all the private law subjects we’ve done in Bergen, it was definitely my favorite. It’s cool to revisit it in the Chinese context!
A lot of the material law is the same. Also, just like in Norway, there’s all these interesting borderline cases — many of them arising from our rapidly changing digital world. For instance: when can you own a picture that you created through artificial intelligence? Maybe you can’t own something that’s generated from a five-word prompt, but what if you used thirty?
Another case that I recall was one where someone posted a picture of a flower bouquet in a WeChat group. The florist sued, claiming that they owned the work and by extension, the exclusive right to publication (cf. Copyright Law of the People’s Republic of China Art. 10 (1)). The court agreed that the florist owned the work (which makes sense, I suppose — but it’s still interesting to me that you can own a flower arrangement). However, they decided that the WeChat group, consisting only of a couple of friends, didn’t constitute the public. But it was clear that a such a social media group could constitute the public, had it looked different.
Our professor took a pause there, and asked us to think about what that means. The court seemed to allude to a hypothetical situation where if it was a really famous person who shared such a photo, then it would have been a breach of the right of publication. But what if it was a moderately famous person? What if it was someone who is huge in a specific community, but no one else knows about them? How about just a really popular person in a local community? When are you famous enough so that your circle can be regarded as the public?
In my view, intellectual property law is filled with these great examples of how sometimes the lines we draw in law aren’t perfect — but you still gotta draw ‘em somewhere.
I want to share one more thing I’ve learnt in this class. From my memory of it in Bergen, we largely considered intellectual property rights as an extension of property rights in general. An author owns the book they write in a similar way to how they own the house they live in. But underlying in our legal system (both in China and Norway, and in a number of other countries too) is what’s called the moral rights in copyright law. The moral rights aim to protect the non-economic interests of the creator — like their artistic integrity and reputation. A lot of the exclusive rights you have when you own a work, such as the right to be attributed as the creator or to object to derogatory treatment of your work, are grounded in these personal interests. They might have an economic side as well, but oftentimes that’s just part of the reason — and sometimes it’s not applicable at all. There are some rights the creators have, just because they created something.
It is, at its core, a very romantic idea. It stems from the image of the artist working tirelessly to perfect their craft and their creations. Our professor mused that we’re not really sure what to do with this concept today, when so much art is created so fast. It’s still a part of our legal framework — but can we apply it the same when the creation is “just” a couple of clicks?
The concept of moral rights is more emphasized in China and Europe than for example in the US, by the way. Our professor cited thinkers like Kant to be influential here. Not sure what thinkers the Americans looked to.
Chinese Economic Law
My final class of the week. I have little prior knowledge about economics, and I really feel it. Our professor is the dean of the law school and the ‘flink pike’ in me (what little’s left of her) wants to make sure I’m paying attention. But it’s also an evening class, on an otherwise packed day, so sometimes my mind wanders.
For the term paper in this class, we’re writing a review of a book on China’s economy. I’ve chosen Age of Ambition: Chasing Fortune, Truth, and Faith in the New China by Evan Osnos. It got some really good reviews. Should be interesting.
Bonus: International Security Studies
In addition to the law subjects, I’m auditing a class called “International Security Studies”. I’m having so much fun taking it! It’s great to be in a different type of academic environment. Where my law classes generally are made up of half bachelor-level exchange students such as myself, and half semi-seasoned lawyers looking to get their nth degree, this class is for exchange students only. It’s also a big group, and people participate actively. It’s nice.
It’s the only class I have on Tuesdays, and it’s from 18:40 to 21:30. Tuesdays have becomes much a great day of the week. I usually wake up late-ish, do a little school work and wander around, before grabbing dinner with my classmates and friends Atsuya, Aline and Valerie. Practicing slow living.
The content of the class is cool, too. We always start with “solving” a couple logical fallacies. I think the idea is that understanding logical fallacies is important in game theory, which is utilized a lot in international relations analysis (I didn’t know this). Since I’m only auditing and not doing any exams, I sometimes allow myself to not attention. Like this week — I wrote most of this entry during this week’s ISS class.
A final, general life update
I want to shout it from the rooftops: I love Peking Univeristy! In fact, I love everything about my everyday life here. I love waking up to the sun shining into my room every morning. I love biking to university, swerving scooters and cars all with a smile on my face like ☺. I love the food. And the prices! There’s many days where I spend 30-ish kroner or less. Can you, reader not currently in China, believe it?
And now, since last week or so, the weather has been so, so good. We’ve already gotten most of the prompts for our final papers, so I technically could start writing them now. I’m going to try to be good and get them done early. There are some places in China that it would be fun to see before I go. Would be good to be completely free in the summer…
Alright! I’ll round off there. It was fun writing here again. If you made it this far and there’s some parts that you liked or didn’t like, it would be great to know!
Hope you have a great weekend. Good-bye!
– Maja
(PS: this entry’s title is stolen from this Swedish song I stumbled upon. I considered modifying the title to “Peking Took My Law Away”, but decided that was too stupid. Also, I do love PKU, so why not.)
Maja's Musings 