The intellectual piracy common on the streets of New York originated in China. From electronic devices like phones and laptops to luxury brands like Gucci and Dolce & Gabbana, intellectual piracy has become a serious problem in China, with its wings spreading as far as Chinatown in New York City. The video Intellectual Piracy in China talks about the high amount of piracy that comes from China; explains how counterfeit products take over most of the market in China and gives the specific example of counterfeit Viagra in China which could result in deadly situations as counterfeit versions of the pill are produced with chemicals that could be dangerous for human use. The Addressing Piracy in China case touches on similar topics as the video and focuses primarily on counterfeit Apple products offered from China. According to the article, there were at least five Apple-branded stores in just one city in China (“Coping with Piracy in China,” n.d.). However, the article highlights how the counterfeit market in China could actually benefit Apple as a company and not otherwise. This article will analyze what the video and case study focuses on about intellectual piracy in China by examining the content of the video and case study and explaining my opinion with the results obtained and the reasons why I agree with the results of the video, while I disagree with the results of the case study. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay According to the case article, standalone Apple Stores in China have some of the busiest Apple Stores in the world (“ Addressing Piracy in China ,” n.d.). Tourists in China can easily stumble upon one of these own-brand stores and purchase counterfeit Apple products for only a small percentage of the actual cost of the real product. Although hundreds of patent lawyers and investigators are looking for these branded items, the stores and the people behind them, Apple has yet to comment on the entire situation and the case study believes that instead of harming the company, these self-produced products Apple brands are actually promoting the Apple brand for free and this is considered beneficial to Apple (“Coping with Piracy in China,” n.d.). Apple's own-brand stores are providing the current Apple company with a path to promote themselves in a huge market, the Chinese market, at no cost to them. Unfortunately, I do not agree with the results reached in the conclusion of the case study. I find it controversial that the case study explicitly states how huge the market for fake products is in China, but also implies that this is actually beneficial to Apple. Even though the Apple brand is promoted at no cost to them, their products are not sold. Apple is already an international company that has one of the largest customer bases and does not need the unnecessary promotion of a company copying its brand to achieve a beneficial outcome within its own company. Furthermore, the case study specifies that this brings benefits to the Apple company, but the company itself talks about how “more than $11 billion is lost to piracy every year” (“Piracy Prevention,” n.d.). In their website, Apple mainly focuses on software piracy, but nevertheless continues to show that in any case they are negatively affected by piracy. Software piracy is still intellectual piracy, ideas are still stolen and profits are made..