Justice is Blind

[cargirl1990]

^^^^^^^^^ It's what we Europeans have been saying about the American market Fords and GMs for decades

i feel your anger dude.

[f6fhellcat13]

I think that our problem is not so much racism, but fear for the status quo of car quality and engineering. (Call me old-fashioned. )
If China eventually does get into the global car market in a big way, they will significantly undercut all of the competition. If this happens current carmakers will be forced to dumb down and under engineer their cars. Then we are left with a market flooded with cheap, but shitty, cars. As car enthusiasts, we want well designed cars and, I assume, love the engineering of them. If shoddy workmanship and R&D become the kings of automotive design, I think all of us will be disappointed.
I realize that China's car industry is very young and the easiest way for them to get their feet wet is to copy other's designs, but I don't think it's the best way.
The Koreans did a similar thing in the '80s, I think trying to copy Japanese designs, and look at them now. They are still struggling for acceptance in terms of perception and originality.
The Japanese, on the other hand, and I'm well aware they did copy numerous Western designs, started their big marketing thrust in the late '60s and in like 15 years or so they had become popular. I realize oil crises and idiotic domestics had a lot to do with it, but the Japanese still brought something either different or better than the current thing to the table.
This "originality" allowed Japan to become such a force. I think that the Koreans are now realizing they cannot just make the cheapest crappiest car out there and expect it to sell. Hyundai's recent improvements speak a lot to that, imo.
However, the Koreans were a much more minor threat to car quality. I think China has the strength to muscle its way in with shitty cars and force everybody to sink to their level.

[cargirl1990]

I think that our problem is not so much racism, but fear for the status quo of car quality and engineering. (Call me old-fashioned. )
If China eventually does get into the global car market in a big way, they will significantly undercut all of the competition. If this happens current carmakers will be forced to dumb down and under engineer their cars. Then we are left with a market flooded with cheap, but shitty, cars. As car enthusiasts, we want well designed cars and, I assume, love the engineering of them. If shoddy workmanship and R&D become the kings of automotive design, I think all of us will be disappointed.
I realize that China's car industry is very young and the easiest way for them to get their feet wet is to copy other's designs, but I don't think it's the best way.
The Koreans did a similar thing in the '80s, I think trying to copy Japanese designs, and look at them now. They are still struggling for acceptance in terms of perception and originality.
The Japanese, on the other hand, and I'm well aware they did copy numerous Western designs, started their big marketing thrust in the late '60s and in like 15 years or so they had become popular. I realize oil crises and idiotic domestics had a lot to do with it, but the Japanese still brought something either different or better than the current thing to the table.
This "originality" allowed Japan to become such a force. I think that the Koreans are now realizing they cannot just make the cheapest crappiest car out there and expect it to sell. Hyundai's recent improvements speak a lot to that, imo.
However, the Koreans were a much more minor threat to car quality. I think China has the strength to muscle its way in with shitty cars and force everybody to sink to their level.

wow, rant much? ( joking )

[blingbling]

Saying it isn't "illegal" because the court said is fine is like saying a court can't be corrupted. Perhaps not in this case, I can't say it, but generally, you logical isn't flawless.
So the Italian Prime Minister didn't do something illegal just because a year ago he established a new law stating he is immune from the main art of legal actions.

the legality of a phenomina is, indeed, for the (uncorrupted, as you say) court to decide. a head of state that makes himself exempt from laws may not be altruistic, or good, but that is up to the individuals to decide. but by definition, the legality of that is upheld since what he says is legislated into law. you guys tend to mix up legality with the good/bad.

its like if I kill a serial killer with my hands by wringing his neck before he kills more innocent people. this is illegal, but still a good thing in my opinion. likewise, slavery in the dirty south used to be LEGAL, but BAD in my opinion.

so no, this logic is not flawed. you have to differentiate between legality and the good or bad

Also, we aren't really talking about reverse engineering in most cases, but just of badly designed and built cars that looks exactly like much more famous and important (and eventually even better built) cars.
I don't think the BMW X5 is the best engineered car in the world, but I'm pretty sure the Shangyuan CEO isn't even remotely as good as the X5.

again, there is nothing wrong with coming out with an inferior product. this is a capitalist world, and if people want to pay less for a lesser product, it will be so. if Shangyuan wants to make the CEO, and people are happy buying it, and the state/court do not have a problem with it, i really fail to see what is the big fuss.

Strange you say that. I'm Chinese myself, and it's not as if I hate my own country? I just truly believe this "cheapness" should be avoided. Our culture have this incredible lust for money, and it seems like they're happy to sacrifice everything for that. This I really disapprove. That's why when I saw this article, I was quite disappointed, and angry. This is a shame to my nation, and pointing it out is not blatant racism.

okay i see it is not really racism. what you see as cheapness, i see it as efficient. as for sacrificing everything? what is being sacrificed for money? can you point it out exactly. do not be ashamed of your nation. you will eventually see the beauty of it.

no blatent engineering
It is ILLEGAL to reverse engineer and then build the same on any product with patents, trademark or image intellectual property.

so why did the chinese not lose their case? they must have done it legally. they came into the greek court and came out on top. they played by someone else's rules and came out on top.

Oh and recently one of the companies were stopped from exporting a blatant Fiat copy ( might have been the Panda ? ) and if they try to import them to weurope they will pay a 50K euro fine for EACH car sold. So in that case it was upheld.

this just makes me think that the smart car clone must have done something different to differentiate it from the original smart car. regardless, this IS a case of when it is illegal. they car you speak of is the peri minicar. it does not look like a panda as much as the other chinese car looks like a smartcar, but i guess the courts rule on engineering rather than design

Until 1991 China didn't recognise engineering copyright or design rights.
Only when international trade grew did pressure come to sign to the international accords.

hahaha well what did you expect them to do? the most populous country was recovering from a century of humiliation, opium, and war crimes, along with political strife, and unavoidable famine/overpopulation that came with it.

[LeonOfTheDead]

the legality of a phenomina is, indeed, for the (uncorrupted, as you say) court to decide. a head of state that makes himself exempt from laws may not be altruistic, or good, but that is up to the individuals to decide. but by definition, the legality of that is upheld since what he says is legislated into law. you guys tend to mix up legality with the good/bad.

its like if I kill a serial killer with my hands by wringing his neck before he kills more innocent people. this is illegal, but still a good thing in my opinion. likewise, slavery in the dirty south used to be LEGAL, but BAD in my opinion. so no, this logic is not flawed. you have to differentiate between legality and the good or bad

I'm not confusing them, and don't end up in a semantic war.
By illegal, and I'm not consider the vocabulary definition (see: don't nitpick), I mean someone copying someone else stuff without adding something to improve it, to make it just different, to make it distinguishable, without asking any sort of permission and relying on the similarities between the two products to sell yours.
There might be a law saying it's fair, but when the Italian judge came out saying the two cars (both the X5 clone and the Smart clone) are sold at different prices confronted to the actual X5 and the Smart, there couldn't be a conflict.
That's exactly the point of a fake product though.
A fake bag sold for 100$ isn't obviously aiming to the same woman paying 3.500 $ for the same bag. But that's illegal, not only replicating the bradge, but also replicating the style.
That's why I said illegale, no matter what the judge said.
and that's why I consider illegal what the Prime Minister has done/is doing, because he is doing it in a legal way.

again, there is nothing wrong with coming out with an inferior product. this is a capitalist world, and if people want to pay less for a lesser product, it will be so. if Shangyuan wants to make the CEO, and people are happy buying it, and the state/court do not have a problem with it, i really fail to see what is the big fuss.

I'm not considering inferior products, but inferior (or even superior) products relying on the image established by someone else.
If it was just a case of a cheap car looking like nothing else, then yes, it would have been up just to those willing to buy it, as it happens for other chinese and non cars.

[blingbling]

its pretty hard to avoid a semantic war when you are talking about the legality of something. you have to pick your word very carefully.

but regardless i HIGHLY DOUBT that they are really relying on another brands IMAGE to sell. i mean anyone who is buying a car knows very well that the logo is different and they are purchasing a cheap imitation with very poor image.

[LeonOfTheDead]

its pretty hard to avoid a semantic war when you are talking about the legality of something. you have to pick your word very carefully.

but regardless i HIGHLY DOUBT that they are really relying on another brands IMAGE to sell. i mean anyone who is buying a car knows very well that the logo is different and they are purchasing a cheap imitation with very poor image.

then why to make it looks exactly like an X5?

[092326001]

i don' really care
i trust that the people are sensible that they can differentiate between high quality product and a cheap copy
i don't think that chinese cars will drag down the rest of the automotive world, i'd think that the european makers would actually go for higher quality and leave the cheap stuff for the chinese

[blingbling]

then why to make it looks exactly like an X5?

buddy, if someone is dumb enough to buy a car that looks like an x5 because of the image of the x5, they clearly deserve to be exploited

[Rockefella]

The issue at hand, I think is that a copy of something like an X5 or Panda helps the sale of the car at BMW or FIAT's expense considering the patents and engineering/design funding.

[NSXType-R]

I think that our problem is not so much racism, but fear for the status quo of car quality and engineering. (Call me old-fashioned. )
If China eventually does get into the global car market in a big way, they will significantly undercut all of the competition. If this happens current carmakers will be forced to dumb down and under engineer their cars. Then we are left with a market flooded with cheap, but shitty, cars. As car enthusiasts, we want well designed cars and, I assume, love the engineering of them. If shoddy workmanship and R&D become the kings of automotive design, I think all of us will be disappointed.
I realize that China's car industry is very young and the easiest way for them to get their feet wet is to copy other's designs, but I don't think it's the best way.
The Koreans did a similar thing in the '80s, I think trying to copy Japanese designs, and look at them now. They are still struggling for acceptance in terms of perception and originality.
The Japanese, on the other hand, and I'm well aware they did copy numerous Western designs, started their big marketing thrust in the late '60s and in like 15 years or so they had become popular. I realize oil crises and idiotic domestics had a lot to do with it, but the Japanese still brought something either different or better than the current thing to the table.
This "originality" allowed Japan to become such a force. I think that the Koreans are now realizing they cannot just make the cheapest crappiest car out there and expect it to sell. Hyundai's recent improvements speak a lot to that, imo.
However, the Koreans were a much more minor threat to car quality. I think China has the strength to muscle its way in with shitty cars and force everybody to sink to their level.

I think you hit all the most important points.

Japan had copied some of the successful cars- look at the early Celicas and Supras. Plus, the Mazda Miata.

They moved away from it when they got successful.

The Koreans didn't do that- they tried to undercut everyone with their prices, and it worked to a point. Now they're trying to move up the market to a more upscale sort of thing, and are hitting a roadblock because they've perpetuated a stereotype.

If it really is an inferior product, it'll sink on arrival. If it isn't, it'll succeed.

Look at all the crash test stuff- there's no way these cars are leaving the Chinese market if they're that crappy.

And basically, I leave it at that. Even the Tata Nano won't be leaving the cheaper Asian market unless it goes under heavy modifications, and that had serious engineering forethought.

Sure, the Chinese knockoffs are a real eyesore, but they really aren't a threat. And if they do become one, they'll make everyone step up their act. Capitalism is self correcting.

[blingbling]

The issue at hand, I think is that a copy of something like an X5 or Panda helps the sale of the car at BMW or FIAT's expense considering the patents and engineering/design funding.

which is why the courts pwned the panda and x5 clones and not the smartcar clone

[cargirl1990]

i did some research on the Chinese cars and found new horrors ( that i never knew about ) in Chinese automotive design. a bunch of knock-off Bimmers, Benzs, Toyota's, and i could of swore that they took the Nissan Cube, and possibly other vehicles as well.
( like the car A Puff of Cloud will go far in the automotive world, or the baseball cap shaped car. )
seeing those cars kinda piss me off.

[jump15vc]

which is why the courts pwned the panda and x5 clones and not the smartcar clone

You sound like someone that downloads all their music and movies for free, wears fake oakleys, a knockoff rolex and imitation lacoste shirt. The whole point of this thread is that people are saying that the courts got it wrong by allowing the smart car clone off. If you think a court has never made the wrong decision your head is deeper in the sand than Baghdad.

If chinese companies are allowed to continue copying the work of other manufacturers it will devalue the market as a whole. in a free market you should come up with a better idea than someone elses if you want to make money. thats why there are patent and copyright laws. im all for chinese cars if they are of completely original design and good quality, but dont try to pass this crap off as real cars are automotive progress for china. all it is it them relying solely on the ability to mass produce without any intelligence or engineering whatsoever. it just shows chinese industry for what it is.

and as for your point regarding chinas decision not to recognize the copyrights or engineering of others until the 1990's and your excuse that they should be given a free pass because they were oppressed or whatever is bs. the rules of the global market are the way they are, play by them or go home. being oppressed is not an excuse to break the law. its like how blacks and latinos are oppressed in america and thats why they commit crimes. its bs and shouldnt be tolerated

[RacingManiac]

One thing I feel the need to stress though, the copying the "design" and copying the "engineering" are 2 different thing. Those cars, at least to my understanding, is copying the design styling of the BMW or Ferrari or whathaveyou. That doesn't mean the car is a copy of a Ferrari or BMW, just that it looks like one. It'll probably be closer to infringing a trademark law rather than intellectual property law. This is particularly confusing concerning automotive since designer and engineers are not one of the same.....

I still think this is far less of an issue than actual counterfeit product sold as a genuine.....You don't want to be buying a bearing or something design to be rated at some load and the counterfeit can only handle 10% or that or something....