Piracy + Trite society; China copies US/JPN cars freely

paultan.org/archives/2004/12/05/china-pirates/


Geely Merie = Benz E-class


Great Wall Motors = Toyota HiLux

Sing SUV - Nissan X-Trail
Geely - Ripped off Toyota

I’ll just use the same reply I posted when we discussed this same issue some time back in the Vroom vroom forum, forgive me for repeating myself…

[quote=“plasmatron”]oh sure… those nasty communists running around copying other company’s products again eh?.. nothing like the honest, god fearing, democratic Taiwanese who never rip off anything…

yep, all those Kymco, GuanYang and YueLung bikes, scooters, cars and engines were a product of good old fashioned Taiwanese creativity and originality… nothing to do with Japan really, especially not Honda… and all those lovely home grown Taiwanese DaTung appliances have nothing to do with reverse engineered Western/Japanese products… and pirated PC software and DVD’s is one thing you just won’t find on the streets of Taiwan… no sir…

Simply despicable how the mainlanders can stoop to such dirty tactics of copying other peoples products… They need to be taught a lesson in good old fashioned Taiwanese creativity, imagination and honesty… :unamused: [/quote]

Who would actually buy a car with those names? :laughing:

[quote=“plasmatron”]I’ll just use the same reply I posted when we discussed this same issue some time back in the Vroom vroom forum, forgive me for repeating myself…

[quote=“plasmatron”]oh sure… those nasty communists running around copying other company’s products again eh?.. nothing like the honest, god fearing, democratic Taiwanese who never rip off anything…

yep, all those Kymco, GuanYang and YueLung bikes, scooters, cars and engines were a product of good old fashioned Taiwanese creativity and originality… nothing to do with Japan really, especially not Honda… and all those lovely home grown Taiwanese DaTung appliances have nothing to do with reverse engineered Western/Japanese products… and pirated PC software and DVD’s is one thing you just won’t find on the streets of Taiwan… no sir…

Simply despicable how the mainlanders can stoop to such dirty tactics of copying other peoples products… They need to be taught a lesson in good old fashioned Taiwanese creativity, imagination and honesty… :unamused: [/quote][/quote]
Sanyang is licensed by Honda, Yulong by Nissan, and Kymco by Kawasaki, AFIK.

Some parts of some designs were licensed to those Japanese companies, but long after the licenses lapsed, and despite protracted legal action by Honda Japan, the big 2, SYM and Kymco continue to steal intellectual property through continued use of the Japanese designs in their original form and crucially as an R&D base for all subsequent engine versions and modifications… That’s why you’ll never see a “new engine for 2006” advert only new body plastic and “Bold New Graphics” as Redwagon puts it… Hartford and the like to this day continue to be nothing but blatantly stolen 3rd generation knock off’s of Japanese design…

Don’t get me wrong, I think those Mainland knock off cars are atrocious and they should be prevented from building them, but when it comes to stealing other’s intellectual property and knocking off Western designs, the Taiwanese, together with their Mainland counterparts are right down at the bottom of the barrel…

These people would:

[Scooter slogans

[Bizarre English names - Part 2

The entire auto industry is notorious for “ripping off” each other. There is only so much originality to four wheels and a body housing an internal combustion engine.

I just love those auto mag with that claim the “latest protype” photo being test driven with certain body panel parts covered with tissue paper.

I’m just waiting for my “Lamborghini Mercy”, “Ferra 360”, and “Mc’Lara”.

You can always swap out the bootleg nameplates with real ones and none would be the wiser :bravo:

Most of not all of these Chinese auto makers had joint ventures with their Western counterparts. Similar technology, designs and other attributes. They also target significantly different markets - the Laibao (CR-V ripoff) is roughly half the price of the Honda. Pricing is usually half or in some cases less than half for the Chinese brands.

So whats your point Shrimpcrack? Did you just realize Chinese companies are copycats? (Not in a bad way.)

You mean like GM Fiero that was a smaller cheaper version of the exotic Italian sports car.

The entire auto industry copies from each other because there are only so many suppliers and design companies out there. The USA is still doing variations of the Ford Taurus designs of the late 80’s in the mid size sedan segment for pete sakes.

Why not point out Taiwan is the largest supplier of unlicensed OEM body panels for the after market.

To try to single out the PRC as doing something “wrong” in this industry is a joke. Because the auto industry has been doing the same thing for years.

I don’t remember a Commandment along the lines of “Thou shalt not copy”… does anyone else?

At the end of the day, “designs” are not assets in the traditional sense. My ability to build to a design does not infringe upon your ability to build the same design. I can’t “steal” something from you, if you retain the same rights to use that item.

The reason we have intellectual property laws is not because it’s immoral to “copy”, but because it can stifle innovation. In this context, I assure you the Chinese auto-makers will not stifle innovation for anyone on this planet. Every engineer the automakers can find is sitting in their cubicles right this second, trying to build the next great feature for the benefit of consumers world-wide.

If you build a really cool chair, and I learn how to build the same chair tomorrow, but sell it for half the price… I don’t care if you call me a “copycat”. My face will be burning with shame all the way to the bank.

There’s a reason why folks passed intellectual property laws: so that “objective” (or some crude imitation of such) can try to defend the rights of those who innovate and create. The automakers have plenty of financial+legal resources to defend their rights under these laws, so no crocodile tears need be shed for their benefit. If/when we see these cars show up in American + Western markets (and we certainly are), then you can take your claims of “illegal” copying, and shove it.

Intellectual property isnt being enforced because half these ‘fake’ cars have doors that’ll actually seal on the original.

These are direct copies.

Plus the government is doing little, kinda like when SONY sued SQNY China and got less than pocket change. Very effective if you like making only the lawyers rich.

[quote=“ac_dropout”]Why not point out Taiwan is the largest supplier of unlicensed OEM body panels for the after market.

To try to single out the PRC as doing something “wrong” in this industry is a joke. Because the auto industry has been doing the same thing for years.[/quote]

And on a deeper level, almost any social “ill” that can be blamed on China today pretty much can be found in Taiwan, if not now, then in the very recent past.

Some people just need to learn to look in the mirror.

Bashing China will not bring about Taiwanese independence, but it gives some hardcore shrills a false sense of confidence. :smiley:

[quote=“zeugmite”][quote=“ac_dropout”]Why not point out Taiwan is the largest supplier of unlicensed OEM body panels for the after market.

To try to single out the PRC as doing something “wrong” in this industry is a joke. Because the auto industry has been doing the same thing for years.[/quote]

And on a deeper level, almost any social “ill” that can be blamed on China today pretty much can be found in Taiwan, if not now, then in the very recent past.

Some people just need to learn to look in the mirror.[/quote]
Any social ill can be found anywhere on the planet. We’re comparing on scale. Theres no adequate comparison to China in the number of WTO complaints.

I mean granted, I’m pretty sure there are at least 100 people guilty of trademark violations in the USA (heck everytime you sing Happy Birthday), but thats still not comparable in scale.

[quote=“ShrimpCrackers”]Theres no adequate comparison to China in the number of WTO complaints.

I mean granted, I’m pretty sure there are at least 100 people guilty of trademark violations in the USA (heck everytime you sing Happy Birthday), but thats still not comparable in scale.[/quote]
I suggest yet again that you know not of what you speak.

The US has been the target of far more WTO complaints than China.

A BMW in Taiwan, or Shanghai, or Beijing, is like a Louis Vitton handbag in a Tipperary bog. Feckin’ stupid looking and completely surplus to requirements. I am still incredulous when I see the M5s and 540is etc crawling along at 5mph the pot-holed, tank-proving-ground-style roads here on 19" rims.

My wife asked a bloke once who’d just bought a BMW 330 whether the car was rear or front wheel drive. He didn’t know. I ask you.

[quote=“cctang”] “designs” are not assets in the traditional sense. My ability to build to a design does not infringe upon your ability to build the same design. I can’t “steal” something from you, if you retain the same rights to use that item.

The reason we have intellectual property laws is not because it’s immoral to “copy”, but because it can stifle innovation.

If you build a really cool chair, and I learn how to build the same chair tomorrow, but sell it for half the price… I don’t care if you call me a “copycat”. My face will be burning with shame all the way to the bank.[/quote]

I disagree with you here… I think that a design for something, for argument’s sake, an engine, is the end product of having the necessary technical skill and ability, intelligence and ingenuity to create that engine as if from thin air… sure it’s design may be an intangible asset, but it remains an asset like any other none the less… obtaining that know how and technical wherewithal not only to build it, but to create it from scratch and overcome the many issues and obstacles to it’s successful development, requires large mental and financial investment and at the end of the day superior skill, ability and ingenuity… if not everyone would have already made their own engines and we wouldn’t have a problem here… the fact that you still have the capacity to manufacture more of your engines, does not change the fact that until you created and designed the engine, and I stole your design, I could not make one… so what ethical right do I have to profit from your superior ingenuity and know how?.. and yet cctang you claim I am acting ethically and legally as long as you still have the capacity to keep making your engines according you your original design?.. Would a Beijing chef who’s business has taken off after he came up with an original and unique secret recipe for the finest tasting Peking Duck ever, gladly pass on this recipe to any other duck restaraunts who asked him for it safe in the knowledge that he can still prepare many more ducks according to his recipe? Of course not, it’s a laughable idea…

international copyright law is just that, it basically stipulates that unless you are the creator of the product, and therefore it’s associated financial value, you do not have the right to copy it and therefore benefit from that value… without the concept there is no value, so it is the concept or the design that is the source of the financial value, not the capacity to manfacture it once it’s been designed… so if I invest the time, intellect, money and effort in creating and copyrighting an engine and someone else who could not have designed that engine themselves comes along, builds my design and profits from it’s sale, in a very real sense they are infringing on my rights and they are stealing this potential value from me that I created by virtue of my superior ability and skill…

I think by saying “copyright laws exist only to encourage innovation”, and “copying other’s industrial designs is not morally wrong.” you are incorrectly oversimplifying the issue… let’s just look at your example… I create a cool chair, the next day, wholly independently you come up with the exact same design entirely of your own ingenuity, and can make it and sell it at half the price, then good on you… no harm, no foul… If I create a chair that uses for example a never before thought of method or material in it’s manufacture, a method or material that nobody else is capable of doing, one that though my own skill and ability I invented at considerable cost in research and development… but you spy on me though a hole in my workshop wall, see how I do it, then go home with this new knowledge and make my chair using the new method/material and sell it at half the price, since unlike me it cost you nothing to obtain this new and unique manufacturing method/material, then in a very real and legal sense, you have illegitimately benefited from my idea and you have stolen the potential value of my new chair that you could not have created yourself…

That is what is happening day in and day out in China and Taiwan… People who do not have the capacity or ingenuity to create, not manufacture, create a concept or product of comparable commercial value themselves are stealing the legally protected creations of others and benefiting financially from manufacturing these stolen concepts… It’s as unethical and illegal as the day is long…

IP laws vary from Country to Country.

It is interesting to note the Pfizer failed to obtain a patent for Viagra in PRC and Brazil, due to the fact it was not considered to be a unique product on the market.

plasmatron - IP laws rarely protects someone from reverse engineering.
If your chair was on the open market and I was able to find a “virgin” engineer to duplicate your chair to exacting specification, the case becomes very weak on infringement. You can get patents, trademarks, and copyrights to protect the “chair” in various ways. But it almost impossible to have the sole rights to a common item such as a chair.

The same with cars. Once the car is on the open market. Anyone can reverse engineer it. That’s how the whole “after market” parts came to being. Forget about gearhead “high performance” market. I’m referring to simple replacement parts like body panels, mufflers, filters, windshields, shocks, etc. All these items are reverse engineered to fit all makes and models without 1 cent going back to the car makers.

The way the auto industry was set up in the PRC, technology transfer was going to happen. It was a big issue in the PRC joining the WTO. PRC leveraged their potential consumer market to ensure that foriegn companies had to find local partners.