Counterfeiting and copyright trespass

[Joesmoke]

http://www.dsmtuners.com/forums/turbo-system-tech/299821-ebay-knockoff-gt35r-testing-3.html


Got kinda ugly after I posted in the 35r knock off testing post, so 1st of all...sorry that some feel I was off topic there. That was not my intention.

I didnt think it was so bad as we had vendors dicussing business matters, people bringing discussions on there about personal business, but anyway...

Well, Ill copy what I said there:

"Sorry guys. I know we all like to save some money, but I have a real problem with any knockoff from any country, and it goes like this:

Reputable manufacturer invents, R&D's, and brings to market widget A. Standard markup for industry is applied and company repays development costs, and begins to make profit. This profit is in turn used for further development of widget A, and new widget B. Meanwhile, widget A cost will come down due to refinement.

And the cycle continues..

Now, the design of widget A is blatantly stolen, and sold en masse. Legitimate company will now have no money to invent widget C. Now what are the rip off guys going to steal?

If an industry (that develops new products) can not survive due to forgeries, who's going to come up with new widgets? Sure, the forgery company thats over sea's may start, but then your local (and country) economy is gone.

Its a bad cycle, and not one I want to perpetuate.

Not to mention, you are supporting someone elses economy! Spend XX extra bucks, support your local and country economy. You live there! If you dont, and it becomes a trend, what do you think your economy will be long term??

I know this is real basic stuff, but it should be brought up and thought about."

Anybody like to discuss this?

 

[VETTE_50_TH]

Not that i want to wish bad things upon anybody. BUT. The way china has acted in the last few months, i hope i dont have to buy anything from that country. The way they have acted is unacceptable, esp. that they are hosting the Olympics. HOW THE HELL DO YOU DENY PASSPORTS FOR THE OLYMPICS??!! Under no circumstance should that have happened. I say every country forfeit and just give all the medals to China since thats the way it looks its going to be anyway.

James

 

[Joesmoke]

Please keep in mind that I have nothing against one country or another, just business that rip off other's ideas. Its bad news, and even worse when you patronize another countries economy with it.

That being said, we all buy from outside our economies, it cant be helped. What can be helped is willingy making a purchase that is ripped off from another business.

What do I do to try and curb that?

I do not shop at walmart (off topic, but I try to support the local stores)
I shop for autoparts and tools from local stores, not box stores (get legitimate brand names and support local shops)

 

[Defiant]

You have a valid point in the thieving of designs by others, and especially by those whose overhead cuts the gut out of what manufacturers have to live with. Here's a specific example: the B&M short shifter. You can buy theirs for $150, or you can buy an exact copy for $30. Is the B&M part a hundred and more dollars better? Well, no, it isn't. It's the same damned part. Some have reported tolerance errors in the pirated part, but still nothing approaching a hundred dollars' difference. Would I pay for the B&M part if the knock-off were available (they weren't, when I got my used one from a member here)? Not a damned chance. Apply the same question to K&N's air filters and their imported counterparts.
You think it's tough now? Wait'll their cars get here. Hyundai/Kia are barely the leading edge.
Is copyright something that actually should be a "right"? What about the right of the consumer to not have to spend as much money? If you could buy everything wholesale, would you? Or do you think it's your "duty" to support the shelf-stockers at Best Buy when the same TV's on sale at Costco for 30% less?

Try to keep this discussion from going political. Although how we'll do that while talking about what is obviously a war, I don't know.

 

[TunaTalon]

Inventions can be protected by law with the patent process. The protection of intellectual property is so basic to our country that it is enshrined in the constitution.

The importance of granting monopolies for new inventions has been recognized in the United States since the adoption of the U.S. Constitution. In Article I, section 8, the U.S. Constitution:

Congress shall have power . . . To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.

As usual the devil is in the details. To be eligible for protection the invention must be "novel" which is loosely interpreted as not obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art.

Another problem is the patent process is expensive. A "small" patent can cost $20.000 in legal fees. Defending a patent in court can cost about $1000,000/year in legal fees.

Not only expensive but slow. I still have patent applications pending that were filed three years ago.

Patents can be filed in many countries by just feeding the law firm but a US patent protects from foreign firms from using the invention in the US. Without getting political and naming names, some countries are better at hosting athletic games than honoring intellectual property rights.

In short, protection is available for inventions but it is not cheap, or fast, or sure.

 

[the_mork]

This is capitalism at work, and honestly China is doing it very well. If there weren't market forces such as direct competition at work then prices would never be driven down and everything that was complex to manufacture would cost a very unreasonable amount. Direct (even copied) competition drives down prices so that more people can afford them and spurs further research to create better products for less money. Without this diversified manufacturing effect you wouldn't be able to afford most of the things that you enjoy in your daily life and most of the country would be jobless.

Do you really believe that you should only drive a Ford? Ford created the first motorcar and nearly every other motorcar built in the the period were replicas. Actually almost every new car is a replica of what someone else did with minor changes but I don't hear you complaining that Mitsubishi or GMC is immoral because they didn't leave Ford's intellectual property alone.

How about life-saving drugs, when you have some great ailment will you be buying the original (and 10x more expensive) drug or the generic version which is chemically identical. If you are going to buy the original then should the old lady in the next room just go without (and die) because she can't afford the extra price tag for morality?

 

[DGajre777]

Not that i want to wish bad things upon anybody. BUT. The way china has acted in the last few months, i hope i dont have to buy anything from that country. The way they have acted is unacceptable, esp. that they are hosting the Olympics. HOW THE HELL DO YOU DENY PASSPORTS FOR THE OLYMPICS??!! Under no circumstance should that have happened. I say every country forfeit and just give all the medals to China since thats the way it looks its going to be anyway.

James

Almost everything that you buy is made in China. They didn't deny passports for the Olympics, they denied their visas. Unfortunately, when the Olympics are held in a foreign country, everyone is subject to government and bureaucratic bullshit.

 

[crimsondragon]

This is just payback for all the third world countries we're exploiting to create our Nike shoes.

 

[TunaTalon]

This is capitalism at work, and honestly China is doing it very well. If there weren't market forces such as direct competition at work then prices would never be driven down and everything that was complex to manufacture would cost a very unreasonable amount. Direct (even copied) competition drives down prices so that more people can afford them and spurs further research to create better products for less money. Without this diversified manufacturing effect you wouldn't be able to afford most of the things that you enjoy in your daily life and most of the country would be jobless.

Selling copies of the intellectual property is not capitalism, see Article 1 of the U.S. constitution. Disrespect of intellectual property rights is communist, see Communist China.

It’s understandable that some people think information is free, just understand that the U.S. constitution is against it and Communism is for it.

Do you really believe that you should only drive a Ford? Ford created the first motorcar and nearly every other motorcar built in the the period were replicas. Actually almost every new car is a replica of what someone else did with minor changes but I don't hear you complaining that Mitsubishi or GMC is immoral because they didn't leave Ford's intellectual property alone.

Ford’s patents have long expired. U.S. law allows for Intellectual Property protection for a limited time to encourage innovation, and then requires that the invention becomes public property to allow expansion of the economy. Smart folks those founders.

How about life-saving drugs, when you have some great ailment will you be buying the original (and 10x more expensive) drug or the generic version which is chemically identical. If you are going to buy the original then should the old lady in the next room just go without (and die) because she can't afford the extra price tag for morality?

Generic drugs are only available after the patent expires for the inventor. This gives the drug companies time to recoup their research investment and then makes drugs cheaper for the country after a few years. Smart folks those founders.

 

[EvolvingGST]

This is capitalism at work, and honestly China is doing it very well. If there weren't market forces such as direct competition at work then prices would never be driven down and everything that was complex to manufacture would cost a very unreasonable amount. Direct (even copied) competition drives down prices so that more people can afford them and spurs further research to create better products for less money. Without this diversified manufacturing effect you wouldn't be able to afford most of the things that you enjoy in your daily life and most of the country would be jobless.

Do you really believe that you should only drive a Ford? Ford created the first motorcar and nearly every other motorcar built in the the period were replicas. Actually almost every new car is a replica of what someone else did with minor changes but I don't hear you complaining that Mitsubishi or GMC is immoral because they didn't leave Ford's intellectual property alone.

How about life-saving drugs, when you have some great ailment will you be buying the original (and 10x more expensive) drug or the generic version which is chemically identical. If you are going to buy the original then should the old lady in the next room just go without (and die) because she can't afford the extra price tag for morality?

I agree with this post to a certain extent. A good example was in 9/11 the company making the drug against antrax or some other disease was raping the Govt who was trying to stock pile the drug. They were charging 2.00 a pill when it cost them less than .01 to make the drug. On the other hand there was a Canadian company making a generic of it which cost about .75. It wasn't until the govt threatened to take away their patent that they lowered it to 1.50 a pill. Before 9/11 it was only about 1.25 a pill.

So its not necessarily fair that people have patents sometimes take too far advantage of their situations thus the need for fair rivalry sometimes.

China and other countries take it to a certain extreme by having no copyrights or intellectual property enforcement. But that is also part of business, its the epitome of capitalism, yeah someone can rip you off and make something you made for no R&D but with technology advancements you need to make something that not even they can copy easily. That is part of business.

 

[TunaTalon]

I agree with this post to a certain extent. A good example was in 9/11 the company making the drug against antrax or some other disease was raping the Govt who was trying to stock pile the drug. They were charging 2.00 a pill when it cost them less than .01 to make the drug. On the other hand there was a Canadian company making a generic of it which cost about .75. It wasn't until the govt threatened to take away their patent that they lowered it to 1.50 a pill. Before 9/11 it was only about 1.25 a pill.

In the world of Intellectual Property the cost of production is pretty much irrelevant to the selling price. In my field of software for example many man-years of creative production can be copied on a single CD for pennies. If I sold three years of my work for $0.39 how could I afford to care for and feed a 1998 Talon.

So its not necessarily fair that people have patents sometimes take too far advantage of their situations thus the need for fair rivalry sometimes.

Fair is a favorite word of the Marxists. In respect for Defiant's admonishments I won't discuss the many times you will hear this word between now and Nov. 4, 2008. Do you think it would be fair for me to be paid thirteen cents per year for my contributions to science? (Ok there's an easy straight line) That's all the cost of production would cover.

China and other countries take it to a certain extreme by having no copyrights or intellectual property enforcement. But that is also part of business, its the epitome of capitalism, yeah someone can rip you off and make something you made for no R&D....

It remains against the law to copy the intellectual property of others in this country. It is the epitome of communism, not capitalism, to copy but just bread and butter for your friendly local patent lawyer.

...but with technology advancements you need to make something that not even they can copy easily.

Patent law requires disclosure of the invention in enough detail that a person of ordinary skill in the art can duplicate it. If we want to keep our inventions secret we can't get a patent. If we want patent protection we must help others copy our invention.

That is part of business.

That's a part of business for patent lawyers. Not a pleasant business maybe but lucrative.

 

[EvolvingGST]

In the world of Intellectual Property the cost of production is pretty much irrelevant to the selling price. In my field of software for example many man-years of creative production can be copied on a single CD for pennies. If I sold three years of my work for $0.39 how could I afford to care for and feed a 1998 Talon.



Fair is a favorite word of the Marxists. In respect for Defiant’s admonishments I won’t discuss the many times you will hear this word between now and Nov. 4, 2008. Do you think it would be fair for me to be paid thirteen cents per year for my contributions to science? (Ok there’s an easy straight line) That’s all the cost of production would cover.




It remains against the law to copy the intellectual property of others in this country. It is the epitome of communism, not capitalism, to copy but just bread and butter for your friendly local patent lawyer.



Patent law requires disclosure of the invention in enough detail that a person of ordinary skill in the art can duplicate it. If we want to keep our inventions secret we can’t get a patent. If we want patent protection we must help others copy our invention.



That’s a part of business for patent lawyers. Not a pleasant business maybe but lucrative.

Apparently you didnt read a word of what i wrote collectively but decide to pick it appart due to how you wanted to to section it off.

My first example which you totally missed the point of was that people take advantage of their situations thus why patents don't always work for the better.

And you are wrong, its against american law to copy in america. Key word being juristiction. Its illegal to sell those copies in the US, thus they sell it from across the world and ship it here. Because you are protected by american law does not mean you are protected against the world.

Communism is an ideal with what a govt is based on it has nothing to do with intellectual property, thus you are wrong. According to communism, everything belongs to the govt, including intellectual property, including money. So your statement is completely wrong.

Capitalism by definition is fair game without govt. So thus patents theortically in capitalism shouldn't exist. So it is the theory of capitalism.

A patent is a barier to entry set up by the govt. In a totally capitalistic society, patents shouldnt exist because there are no such things as barriers to entry. Thanks for playing

The point of my post was nothing what you argued against. But I think you should express your opinion without trying to make a point about nothing.

 

[TunaTalon]

Thank you. I'll just stand by my prior post and decline a flaming contest.

 

[Joesmoke]

Lots of good talk here people.

I just wanted to bring this point up so the next time someone went to the store (or online) they would consider their purhase carefully.

A couple of points:
1. I try and buy name brand drugs. Why? Because those are the people researching the next type of drug that could save my life. Of course, in my case this is just tylenol and advil, but the point remains the same. Emergency medicine however...I wish companies would not gouge on that.

I spoke to my neighbor about how much money could be saved by treating medical ailments in his home country of India. He talked about the price of drugs there and noted how cheap they were. I said what about health and safety regs for the drug companies? He eventually admitted that they were not prevalent...save a few bucks and maybe die?

2.The concept of the car. Yep, ford introduced the 1st one, and now others create 4 wheel mechanisms. I dont consider that in the same league as chinese turbos, but I dont know why. Ill have to think about that...

A lot of comments on how this is helpful, and creates competition (in round about words).
If another manufacturer improved on a previous design. Thats competion and is helpful for consumers. When someone blatantly creates an inferior copy however, that's where the problem is.

And Defiant mentioned the right of the consumer to not spend as much money. Of course, consumers should have a choice and be able to shop, but this comment brings a couple of thoughts:

Shop around for the best price,but, If you buy from outside your economy, you are hurting it. If you buy an offshore copy product, its like a double whammy.
This includes the big box stores to some extent. Thats a choice you can make, as long as you realize the long term issues.

Is this "fair" to the consumer that now has to pay a higher price for a name brand local product? Well, short term thinking says no, its not fair. Long term thinking says that hey, If I dont buy locally (and non-ripoff) and too many others dont, you will be in for a world of hurt. Maybe not today, but eventually.

Also, the assumption is made that the consumer should also always be allowed to buy whatever they want, if they can get it for cheap enough via any means. Maybe the consumer can't afford it right now and should wait. The instant gratification society...

 

[Joesmoke]

And the issue about patents. They are not a barrier set up by the govt. They are legal mechanisms set up to protect intellectual property rights.

They are no different then the laws made to protect a citizen in a civil situation.

The patent, IMHO, is one of the cornerstones of capitalism. It is supposed to allow
business (capitalists) to develop items and create...business and economy.

 

[the_mork]

After rereading my post I realize that part of my point was not expressed very clearly. I had wanted to make a point about MHI and other quality turbo companies occupying a fairly different niche from the ebay/chinese turbos where the name brand turbos have a (probably well earned) reputation for reliability and performance while these knock-offs do not and therefore appeal to a different market.

As for the idea of IP and patents I would like to hear what the significance is between the US's policy of expiring patents or copyrights as compared to the time it takes to reverse-engineer something. Is it right that someone can copy another person's work at all? Shouldn't we consider eternal patents? If not then what is the magic number? If it is the current lifespan of a US patent (I believe 10 years for drugs I have no idea what it is for other things) why that magic number? Furthermore does this even fall under patent law? What separates a chinese knock off turbo from a forced performance or slowboy custom or hybrid turbo? AFAIK the ebay turbos don't follow the same specifications as Holset or MHI or they would be the same quality and therefore a perfect replacement product for less money.

Should I be loyal to a company just because they came up with something first? Do I owe an allegiance because of some deep (mostly) irrational loyalty? Or do I owe loyalty to the company who can provide the best product at the best price with the most innovative features?

Patent and copyright are inherently not features of true capitalism. The US does not practice capitalism either, we practice a hybrid socialist system with strong capitalistic influence, I do not consider this to be a bad thing necessarily, but depending on the prevailing politics we do slide along a scale that occasionally brings us closer to socialism or farther into free market. Think social security, unemployment, welfare, food stamps, and federal student aid. The idea of taking someone else's product and either producing it for less cost or at a higher level of quality is entirely capitalistic. Remember that ingenuity in products exists not just in the product but in the process by which the product reaches its final form and consumer.

There is more but at them moment I think I've said enough.

 

[VETTE_50_TH]

Almost everything that you buy is made in China. They didn't deny passports for the Olympics, they denied their visas. Unfortunately, when the Olympics are held in a foreign country, everyone is subject to government and bureaucratic bullshit.

True. And my mistake, it was their visas. But, either way, its bullshit.

James

 

[MrBoxx]

Ford created the first motorcar and nearly every other motorcar built in the the period were replicas. Actually almost every new car is a replica of what someone else did with minor changes

Just wanted to clear something up. Ford didn't invent jack. He didn't invent the modern internal combustion engine Daimler, Maybach, Benz, and Otto all had parts in that phase well before Ford got involved. He didn't invent the first horseless carriage, either. He simply refined the process that others had invented and made it available to the mass market.

In other words, Henry Ford copied the ideas of European designers and companies, figured out a way to mass-produce their products at a much cheaper cost, and sell them for thousands less than the original inventors of said products.

Gosh... that sounds an awful lot like what some companies in China are doing, innit?

 

[VETTE_50_TH]

Just wanted to clear something up. Ford didn't invent jack. He didn't invent the modern internal combustion engine Daimler, Maybach, Benz, and Otto all had parts in that phase well before Ford got involved. He didn't invent the first horseless carriage, either. He simply refined the process that others had invented and made it available to the mass market.

In other words, Henry Ford copied the ideas of European designers and companies, figured out a way to mass-produce their products at a much cheaper cost, and sell them for thousands less than the original inventors of said products.

Gosh... that sounds an awful lot like what some companies in China are doing, innit?

You are absolutely right. I can't disagree with that besides they weren't the "first" to build the internal combustion engine. But lets not get into that. What more important is how American companies outsource jobs to these under privileged countries. Yes, it may help the company, and it may help the economy of that country slightly, but in the big scheme of things, it hurts us, becuase jobs have been lost, and it hurts them becuase they begin to rely to much of American jobs and not enough in establishing their own economy. Rather than strengthening their economy the way every nation does, they use American corporations to hand jobs to their citizens for cheap and keeps the masses satisfied becuase now they have a job. Its a never ending cycle unfortunately.

James

 

[Joesmoke]

Quote:

"Should I be loyal to a company just because they came up with something first? Do I owe an allegiance because of some deep (mostly) irrational loyalty? Or do I owe loyalty to the company who can provide the best product at the best price with the most innovative features?"

Perfectly phrased question for the conscience consumer!

I dont think we need to be loyal to the 1st company, if another company has provided a legitimate alternative that is better / faster / cheaper.

The key word is legitimate.

And, if that company is outside your economy, well, you are not buying locally, but it would give incentive for the local company to try and improve.

Of course, if its a mass producing factory VS a local Mom and Pop outfit, Mom and Pop will lose, and you have to think about the long term issues with that.

As far as the automobile, maybe it was a licensing issue? Was his engine different enough to slide by scrutineers? Or maybe it was just a blatant rip off prior to laws and copyright protection in place. It was a very different time.

Catchy new name for the thread BTW, thanks for that!

 

[Joesmoke]

Outsourcing..I got snagged by that!

In my company, I decided I would not outsource. The only outcome I could see with that is long term, I would put myself out of business.

Then, I got talked into it through a potential new partner. I gave it a try and it was a nightmare! The quality was not there, language barriers.. it was terrible.

I should have listened to myself in the 1st place, but I got greedy. Wont happen again.

Outsourcing is truly another topic, but something else I find very unsettling in North America. Companies get greedy and dont think long term.

 

[Defiant]

Inventions can be protected by law with the patent process. The protection of intellectual property is so basic to our country that it is enshrined in the constitution.

Which doesn't carry any weight in foreign countries who don't recognize our laws, nor those who enforce them.

Just wanted to clear something up. Ford didn't invent jack. He didn't invent the modern internal combustion engine Daimler, Maybach, Benz, and Otto all had parts in that phase well before Ford got involved. He didn't invent the first horseless carriage, either. He simply refined the process that others had invented and made it available to the mass market.

He also was in violation of patent law when he built cars:

The battle between George Selden and Henry Ford

In other words, Henry Ford copied the ideas of European designers and companies, figured out a way to mass-produce their products at a much cheaper cost, and sell them for thousands less than the original inventors of said products.

Gosh... that sounds an awful lot like what some companies in China are doing, innit?

Almost as big a thief as Edison and Bill Gates.

 

[TunaTalon]

For those tuners who don't know why Defiant is dumping on Bill Gates please see: The Unusual History of MS-DOS The Microsoft Operating System

The "Microsoft Disk Operating System" or MS-DOS was based on QDOS, the "Quick and Dirty Operating System" written by Tim Paterson of Seattle Computer Products, for their prototype Intel 8086 based computer.

QDOS was based on Gary Kildall's CP/M, Paterson had bought a CP/M manual and used it as the basis to write his operating system in six weeks, QDOS was different enough from CP/M to be considered legal.

Microsoft bought the rights to QDOS for $50,000, keeping the IBM deal a secret from Seattle Computer Products. Gates then talked IBM into letting Microsoft retain the rights, to market MS DOS separate from the IBM PC project, Gates proceeded to make a fortune from the licensing of MS-DOS.

The best defense I can put up for Gates is that he didn't steal from Gary Kildall directly, he just cheated people that he knew to be thieves. See that makes it all better.

As for patents in foreign countries:
My old company applied for patents in most of the advanced countries in the world, except China. I would like to report what my patent attorney said about the state of Intellectual Property in China but this is a family site viewed by tender young tuners.

 

[Defiant]

If you can find it, there's a really good documentary about computer history called "Triumph of the Nerds"
The Triumph of the Nerds: The Rise of Accidental Empires (1996) (TV)
(not to be confused with the revenge movies). Fascinating tidbits like IBM's disdain for the idea of personal computers making the whole open-architecture PC world possible, and how companies like Microsoft got to where they are more on luck than any other reason.

 

[TunaTalon]

A recent thread about balance shafts reminded me about the history of the Intellectual Property of the 4G63. So back to here for a little IP 4G63 history.

The 4G63 design benefits from the temporary nature of patent protection. The Mitsubishi patent for balance shafts was an improvement on an earlier patent that had expired. If patent protection was indefinite then only the original inventor could make improvements.

Patent number 1,898,459 was issued to Edward Newcomb in 1933 for a means to balance 4 cylinder engines with rotating counterweights.

The 1933 Newcomb was referenced as prior art by Mitsubishi in their 1977 application for Balance shafts. Mitsubishi's improvement was the bearing mounting positions. "This construction protects the bearings from undesirable wear." Mitsubishi received patent number 4,028,963 for the improvement.

Mitsubishi's patent has expired and balance shaft bearings still wear out faster than the main bearings. But that's a whole nother story.