BEIJING, April 11 (Xinhua) -- Chinese Minister of Commerce Bo Xilai on Tuesday lashed out at political and economic figures in the United States for exaggerating the problem of intellectual property rights (IPR) protection in China.

The accusations against China over IPR infringements by some inthe United States were exaggerated, and careful analysis of Sino-US trade figures would show up the exaggeration, the minister said.

He said the growth of US high-tech products exports to China over the past two years was only half that of the European Union's exports, while the EU lagged far behind Japan in exports of high-tech products to China.

It was US restrictions on exports of high-tech products to China, rather than China's problems with IPR protection that affected the balance of bilateral trade, the minister acknowledged.

In a report issued earlier this month, the Office of the United States Trade Representative claimed that a rampant piracy of U.S. products hindered the entry of U.S. goods into China.

The Business Software Alliance, whose members include information technology giants Apple, Dell, Microsoft, HP, IBM, Intel and Adobe, alleged in a report that 95 percent of the application software used by China's corporate world and government departments was pirated.

The alliance claimed that the piracy cost 20 billion U.S. dollars in US economic losses last year.

Analysts, however, say the United States is ratcheting up pressure on China and Sino-U.S. trade disputes have intensified while economic and trade officials from the two countries are holding a ministerial meeting and just before Chinese President Hu Jintao's visit to the United States.

Computer products made in China were mostly labeled as processing trade, the trade of assembling supplied parts, yet products by multinationals accounted for 70 percent of the Chinese domestic market share, the minister said,

"That means quite a number of multinationals are pirating, which I believe is unimaginable, and we have yet to see evidence of that," the minister added.

The IPR issue was not the major cause of the Sino-US trade imbalance, and yet the Chinese government had continued to attach great importance to IPR protection, and increased crackdowns on infringements.

Since the year 2000, Chinese police had detained about 13,000 people suspected of breaking IPR laws in cases involving 4.8 billion yuan (some 600 million US dollars), and 3,370 had been charged with violating IPR laws and regulations.

In a nationwide crackdown on trademark infringements in 2005, the police uncovered 3,149 cases involving IPR infringements, up 213. 6 percent year on year.

China's administrative departments also dealt with 49,412 cases involving trademark infringements, 4,767 cases involving patent infringements, and 8,060 of copyright piracy.

Li Dongsheng, deputy director of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce, said China's IPR protection was unique as the government departments were proactive in prosecuting IPR infringements, rather than just reacting after IPR holders filed complaints.

He said 71 percent of the 1,968 trademark infringement cases involving U.S. products had been investigated by the administration on its own initiative.

The Chinese government planned to set up special service centers in some 50 cities within three years to handle domestic complaints upon the infringement of intellectual property rights (IPR), Bo said.

The Ministry of Public Security vowed to crack down not only illegal audio and video compact production lines engaging in pirated products, but also on vendors selling those products.

Bo said IPR protection was a gradual process relying on public education and awareness.

People in developed nations received an average 13 years of education while Chinese had only eight years despite the efforts of the government.

In a drive to increase awareness of IPR protection, the government planned to include IPR knowledge in textbooks for primary school students in order to raise public awareness from childhood, Bo said.

China's fast economic development had been based on improved IPR protection, not the other way round, Bo acknowledged. "We would definitely not promote employment and trade growth at the cost of IPR infringement.

"Even though foreign friends say nothing about China's IPR protection problems, we would do our utmost ourselves to protect IPR," Bo said.