Core Viewpoint - The effectiveness of governance depends on the precision of measures taken to address issues such as "near infringement" and "substantial similarity" in legal concepts, suggesting the need for more operational identification standards [1] Group 1: Governance Measures - It is proposed to include implicit infringement factors such as packaging and color combinations into regulatory scope [1] - A key aspect of governance is to establish a punitive system where "illegal costs > illegal gains" [1] - Consideration should be given to adding relevant clauses in laws to impose higher fines and punitive damages for intentional and repeated infringement in counterfeit food cases [1] Group 2: Legal and Administrative Framework - There is a need to improve the dual connection mechanism between administrative and criminal penalties to achieve a seamless integration of punishment [1] - The goal is to realize a synergistic effect where "1 + 1 > 2" in terms of punitive outcomes [1] Group 3: Collaborative Governance - Addressing counterfeit food issues should not be a solitary effort by regulators but should involve multi-stakeholder collaboration [1] - The government should enforce regulations, companies should enhance self-discipline, platforms should maintain strict oversight, the public should participate in supervision, and industry organizations should fulfill their responsibilities [1]

Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the need for a robust legal framework to combat counterfeit food products, highlighting the importance of establishing a system where the cost of illegal activities exceeds the benefits derived from them [1][2]. Group 1: Legal Framework and Enforcement - The current legal system in China includes laws such as the Anti-Unfair Competition Law, Trademark Law, and Food Safety Law, which collectively provide a comprehensive regulatory framework against counterfeit food [1]. - There is a call for clearer operational standards regarding legal concepts like "similar infringement" and "substantial similarity," which should include elements like packaging and color schemes [2]. - The article suggests increasing penalties for intentional and repeated infringement of food products to enhance deterrence [2]. Group 2: Technological Integration - The application of new technologies, such as blockchain, can create a traceability system from raw material procurement to end sales, improving oversight of counterfeit products [2]. - Smart algorithms can assist in monitoring e-commerce platforms for counterfeit food information, while satellite technology can help identify hidden processing locations [2]. Group 3: Collaborative Governance - Effective governance against counterfeit food requires collaboration among multiple stakeholders, including government agencies, businesses, platforms, and the public [3]. - Initiatives like internal whistleblower rewards, "red and black lists" for businesses selling counterfeit products, and industry associations promoting "genuine product commitments" are being implemented to enhance accountability [3]. Group 4: Market Dynamics and Innovation - The article highlights the importance of balancing the destruction of counterfeit products with the establishment of protective measures for genuine products, using the example of Heilongjiang Wuchang rice, which has implemented a traceability platform and increased R&D investment [3]. - The integration of legal protection and innovation is seen as a way to drive out counterfeit products from the market, demonstrating the principle of "good money drives out bad money" [3].