You can't do much in China. China is a dictatorship, and it appears to
have a national policy of hacking businesses to steal their code and
data. No reason to expect them to respect your rights to your PhD
I don't see anything salvageable in there. The intention clearly is to write that China is a terrible country and has no IP protection at all. Replacing this with a correct nuanced view is against the spirit of this paragraph.
As you say that your advisor works for a UK university, you might be
able to do something there. I have no idea if that's a good idea or
not. Similarly, if anyone tries to claim rights to your invention
outside of China, it's possible you could do something.
So the author has "no idea" and says that some unspecified action might be possible or desirable or not, as long as it's not in China where it's certainly not possible.
This is augmented with actual facts which weren't even hinted at in the original.
Lastly, while certainly suspicious, I wouldn't take it as proven that
your advisor was responsible, at least not based on what you've
This last paragraph is good and important and the only reason I see to keep the answer around at all.
But it's the last paragraph, and so I assume it was vastly overshadowed by the anti-China views expressed in the first and second paragraph in the decision process of the up and down voters.
I think it's anti-democratic and against the spirit of this network to subvert the votes of so many people towards an entirely different answer.
If undesirable content is upvoted I think in general it makes more sense to:
- Add good other answers and trust in the users to upvote them more.
- I've also seen special notes added to answers (outside the answer text) which say that it's not up to the standards of a site.
- As a last resort deletion is more honest than to change an answer into its opposite, even if it means the answer would be trimmed down to the one useful sentence.
(no hard feelings)