Interesting post from Wilier on fakes

unconstituted wrote:

notfastenough wrote:

Crikey has a point. I get that many products and services need to be outsourced and/or offshored to keep the brand company competitive, but if you outsource your proprietary designs to a country famous for a. it's widespread counterfeiting, and b. evidence that even the state colludes in this practise, with efforts to hack into overseas computer systems being traced to Chinese government sources, can a company really be surprised to then find counterfeit products being made available?

As opposed a country like ours that colludes in mass surveillance of its own citizens including capturing private webcam imagery? Or maybe that's okay, and it's our bombing and torturing of overseas nationals in cooked up neo-con war plots that you have issue with? Perhaps you don't mind that but are opposed to the way we're run by corporate interests, landed gentry and a bunch of self-serving career politicians ensuring wealth inequality widens?

Take your red scare sanctimony elsewhere please.

It's got nothing to do with the quite quaint term "Red Scare" it's to do with the Chinese trying to do business while being at least on the surface Maoists.

They represent a massive economy that manufactures on a global scale, they are acquisitive and they are known to engage in industrial espionage just like we have in the past.

They are no different to countries such as the UK and the US when it comes to wanting to make money, the only twist to that is that a communist state does not recognize patents or copyright, this can cause an interesting dilemma when they then engage in the global market

You taking offence because of your childish black and white view of the world and lack of knowledge of social history is not moving the conversation forward. If you really want to get into political mudslinging I could point out that China provides about 90% of the AK47 rifles used by child soldiers in Africa.

MKultra wrote:

unconstituted wrote:

notfastenough wrote:

Crikey has a point. I get that many products and services need to be outsourced and/or offshored to keep the brand company competitive, but if you outsource your proprietary designs to a country famous for a. it's widespread counterfeiting, and b. evidence that even the state colludes in this practise, with efforts to hack into overseas computer systems being traced to Chinese government sources, can a company really be surprised to then find counterfeit products being made available?

As opposed a country like ours that colludes in mass surveillance of its own citizens including capturing private webcam imagery? Or maybe that's okay, and it's our bombing and torturing of overseas nationals in cooked up neo-con war plots that you have issue with? Perhaps you don't mind that but are opposed to the way we're run by corporate interests, landed gentry and a bunch of self-serving career politicians ensuring wealth inequality widens?

Take your red scare sanctimony elsewhere please.

It's got nothing to do with the quite quaint term "Red Scare" it's to do with the Chinese trying to do business while being at least on the surface Maoists.

They represent a massive economy that manufactures on a global scale, they are acquisitive and they are known to engage in industrial espionage just like we have in the past.

They are no different to countries such as the UK and the US when it comes to wanting to make money, the only twist to that is that a communist state does not recognize patents or copyright, this can cause an interesting dilemma when they then engage in the global market

You taking offence because of your childish black and white view of the world and lack of knowledge of social history is not moving the conversation forward. If you really want to get into political mudslinging I could point out that China provides about 90% of the AK47 rifles used by child soldiers in Africa.

UKIP in 2015 then?

Complete nonsense of course - China does have a patent system and you can enforce foreign patent claims in China.

Calling China surface Maoists either ignores the complex reality of a fluid and contradictory market system, or is meaningless. Probably both.

Were the 'childish' and 'black and white' view jibes meant to a self-reflecting irony?

And how do you know so much about my education? Where did you study 'social history' by the way? Oxbridge Social History PHD or?

unconstituted wrote:

MKultra wrote:

unconstituted wrote:

notfastenough wrote:

Crikey has a point. I get that many products and services need to be outsourced and/or offshored to keep the brand company competitive, but if you outsource your proprietary designs to a country famous for a. it's widespread counterfeiting, and b. evidence that even the state colludes in this practise, with efforts to hack into overseas computer systems being traced to Chinese government sources, can a company really be surprised to then find counterfeit products being made available?

As opposed a country like ours that colludes in mass surveillance of its own citizens including capturing private webcam imagery? Or maybe that's okay, and it's our bombing and torturing of overseas nationals in cooked up neo-con war plots that you have issue with? Perhaps you don't mind that but are opposed to the way we're run by corporate interests, landed gentry and a bunch of self-serving career politicians ensuring wealth inequality widens?

Take your red scare sanctimony elsewhere please.

It's got nothing to do with the quite quaint term "Red Scare" it's to do with the Chinese trying to do business while being at least on the surface Maoists.

They represent a massive economy that manufactures on a global scale, they are acquisitive and they are known to engage in industrial espionage just like we have in the past.

They are no different to countries such as the UK and the US when it comes to wanting to make money, the only twist to that is that a communist state does not recognize patents or copyright, this can cause an interesting dilemma when they then engage in the global market

You taking offence because of your childish black and white view of the world and lack of knowledge of social history is not moving the conversation forward. If you really want to get into political mudslinging I could point out that China provides about 90% of the AK47 rifles used by child soldiers in Africa.

UKIP in 2015 then?

Complete nonsense of course - China does have a patent system and you can enforce foreign patent claims in China.

Calling China surface Maoists either ignores the complex reality of a fluid and contradictory market system, or is meaningless. Probably both.

Were the 'childish' and 'black and white' view jibes meant to a self-reflecting irony?

And how do you know so much about my education? Where did you study 'social history' by the way? Oxbridge Social History PHD or?

And yet they engage in industrial espionage and hacking.

This being pointed out caused you to have a flounce and engage in onanistic denouncement of all things British and American in a manner seldom seen outside of the students union lounge of the nearest 6th form college.

MKultra wrote:

unconstituted wrote:

MKultra wrote:

unconstituted wrote:

notfastenough wrote:

Crikey has a point. I get that many products and services need to be outsourced and/or offshored to keep the brand company competitive, but if you outsource your proprietary designs to a country famous for a. it's widespread counterfeiting, and b. evidence that even the state colludes in this practise, with efforts to hack into overseas computer systems being traced to Chinese government sources, can a company really be surprised to then find counterfeit products being made available?

As opposed a country like ours that colludes in mass surveillance of its own citizens including capturing private webcam imagery? Or maybe that's okay, and it's our bombing and torturing of overseas nationals in cooked up neo-con war plots that you have issue with? Perhaps you don't mind that but are opposed to the way we're run by corporate interests, landed gentry and a bunch of self-serving career politicians ensuring wealth inequality widens?

Take your red scare sanctimony elsewhere please.

It's got nothing to do with the quite quaint term "Red Scare" it's to do with the Chinese trying to do business while being at least on the surface Maoists.

They represent a massive economy that manufactures on a global scale, they are acquisitive and they are known to engage in industrial espionage just like we have in the past.

They are no different to countries such as the UK and the US when it comes to wanting to make money, the only twist to that is that a communist state does not recognize patents or copyright, this can cause an interesting dilemma when they then engage in the global market

You taking offence because of your childish black and white view of the world and lack of knowledge of social history is not moving the conversation forward. If you really want to get into political mudslinging I could point out that China provides about 90% of the AK47 rifles used by child soldiers in Africa.

UKIP in 2015 then?

Complete nonsense of course - China does have a patent system and you can enforce foreign patent claims in China.

Calling China surface Maoists either ignores the complex reality of a fluid and contradictory market system, or is meaningless. Probably both.

Were the 'childish' and 'black and white' view jibes meant to a self-reflecting irony?

And how do you know so much about my education? Where did you study 'social history' by the way? Oxbridge Social History PHD or?

And yet they engage in industrial espionage and hacking.

This being pointed out caused you to have a flounce and engage in onanistic denouncement of all things British and American in a manner seldom seen outside of the students union lounge of the nearest 6th form college.

Flounce? Do you know what flounce means?

And no I didn't flounce (I'm still here), and no it wasn't an 'onanistic denouncement of all things British' you sensitive Kipling.

I was taking the piss while making the point that bringing politics into an issue like this is hypocritical.

Still waiting to hear about your 'social history' education pedigree by the way. Do tell.

MKultra wrote:

It's got nothing to do with the quite quaint term "Red Scare" it's to do with the Chinese trying to do business while being at least on the surface Maoists.

They represent a massive economy that manufactures on a global scale, they are acquisitive and they are known to engage in industrial espionage just like we have in the past.

They are no different to countries such as the UK and the US when it comes to wanting to make money, the only twist to that is that a communist state does not recognize patents or copyright, this can cause an interesting dilemma when they then engage in the global market
.

Maoist? China communist? This tells me you know nothing about modern China. Possibly the most capitalist and mercantile society on the face of this planet (China always was very mercantile, a few decades of Mao didn't change that).

Further, do you really think the US and UK do not engage in industrial espionage? They've done so for many decades, and the Snowden documents show the NSA and GCHQ are using their massive surveillance dragnet to do so to this day! So piss off with that...

Finally, go look up when the USA started recognising foreign patents. Hint: It wasn't /that/ long ago. It suited them to ignore others' patents when they were a developing nation, but now... (Edison, Colt, etc. went on tours of Europe to see what new inventions they could nick and patent in the US).

The hypocrisy is oh so strong in this thread.

crikey wrote:

Chickens have come home to roost.

Bike companies are at least partly blame for the whole situation. The whole idea of buying stuff made cheaply elsewhere and putting your stickers and paint job on it is the business model adopted by a large number of firms in the bike industry.

I don't think you can blame the bike companies for the complete disregard a lot of Chinese manufacturing firms have for any intellectual property rights.

This isn't a model "adopted by a large number of firms in the bike industry" as you suggest. It's the model adopted by every single one of them. Selling things for more than they cost to make is generally how business works. If you made something for a living, you would expect to get paid for it at a price the market can bear, or is appropriate for the product. In this regard Wilier are completely correct to charge what they do. You don't like the price, don't buy it.

I read on this site, funny enough, that Wellgo, a chinese factory of pedals is one of two pedal factories that are responsible for %20 or %25 of the worlds pedals. They make everybody elses' pedals but who would buy a Wellgo?

Sidi 700c wrote:

... but who would buy a Wellgo?

Plenty of MTB'ers