Sy,
I just looked in my spam and its all adult dating and medical crap from canada. Not one rip off.
But can I just say that if I could afford to buy my wife a 15K handbag or a 10K watch for myself, I wouldn't be parting with my money on some dodgy site.
I don't think people who buy the real thing are less inclined to because some spammer is trying to sell them.
We have gone on a bit of a tangent here. I think its time to reform copyright and patent law. Google just armed them selves with nortel patents for the the next battle with apple or the new bullies on the block Oracle. It stiffles innovation and helps self serving lawyers.
I just looked in my spam and its all adult dating and medical crap from canada. Not one rip off.
But can I just say that if I could afford to buy my wife a 15K handbag or a 10K watch for myself, I wouldn't be parting with my money on some dodgy site.
I don't think people who buy the real thing are less inclined to because some spammer is trying to sell them.
We have gone on a bit of a tangent here. I think its time to reform copyright and patent law. Google just armed them selves with nortel patents for the the next battle with apple or the new bullies on the block Oracle. It stiffles innovation and helps self serving lawyers.
Law in general needs reform, but real reform is as likely as Scarlett Johanssen showing up at my door to offer me a hummer. Law is driven by rent-seeking. Nonetheless, there's still the question of morality.
Student A spends hours and hours studying, doing homework, hitting the books. Student B parties. On test day, Student B looks over A's shoulder and copies the answers. They both pass and are awarded diplomas.
Student B argues that he's only making a degree more accessible to others, He argues that Student A isn't hurt. He argues that he is a poor, underprivileged sort doing the best he can. Student C read a philosophy book once and agrees, averring that "not copying" and "doing the hard work for yourself" is a social construct. B and C point out that there have been no laws broken.
So it's all good, right?
Student A spends hours and hours studying, doing homework, hitting the books. Student B parties. On test day, Student B looks over A's shoulder and copies the answers. They both pass and are awarded diplomas.
Student B argues that he's only making a degree more accessible to others, He argues that Student A isn't hurt. He argues that he is a poor, underprivileged sort doing the best he can. Student C read a philosophy book once and agrees, averring that "not copying" and "doing the hard work for yourself" is a social construct. B and C point out that there have been no laws broken.
So it's all good, right?
the point you made was getting a bargain without respect to brands, trademarks and integrity of others.
i suggest that there is no respect for brands and integrity of others in the business primarily in china. Sure we can nit pick and talk about vietnam, thailand etc. etc. but at the end of the day, the majority of the trade balance between countries that has low respect for brands and integrity is china. you can make the claim about a place like uzbekistan if you want, but i sincerely doubt that will be much more than an intellectual and not a real exercise.
why do i argue there is low respect for brands and integrity? The examples are many: Chery (chevy), Led Paint children toys, melamin tainted dog food, melamin tainted baby formula, the hawtai porsche look-alike etc. etc.
i took this section from a website called factsanddetails.com:
Chinese often describe counterfeits items as shanzhai, a term that originally described the mountain fortress of a bandit. Of late it has become kind of social statement to buy such goods because they support workers and factories in China but the don’t make big profits for foreign companies.
The Chinese word ‘Shanzhai’ literally means small mountain village, but it's now used to describe fake products that have names similar to famous brands. It became an accepted name for fake goods after ‘Shanzhai Cellphones’ produced by small individual workshops in southern China became popular in the mainland market in the late 2000s. [Source: Xinhua, China Daily, December 30, 2008]
this is the root cause. the reason there is so much copying is because the chinese views that if 90% of labor to make a dvd player sits in china, and that in the reality they have to pay 90% of the profit in licensing fees then the chinese are loosing out. There is even legislative movement going on in china to make discourage licensing from overseas license holders by force patenting and trademarking in china first (the infamous indigenous innovation act). So my point about china isn't a general issue, it is very specific to the conversation imho.
i suggest that there is no respect for brands and integrity of others in the business primarily in china. Sure we can nit pick and talk about vietnam, thailand etc. etc. but at the end of the day, the majority of the trade balance between countries that has low respect for brands and integrity is china. you can make the claim about a place like uzbekistan if you want, but i sincerely doubt that will be much more than an intellectual and not a real exercise.
why do i argue there is low respect for brands and integrity? The examples are many: Chery (chevy), Led Paint children toys, melamin tainted dog food, melamin tainted baby formula, the hawtai porsche look-alike etc. etc.
i took this section from a website called factsanddetails.com:
Chinese often describe counterfeits items as shanzhai, a term that originally described the mountain fortress of a bandit. Of late it has become kind of social statement to buy such goods because they support workers and factories in China but the don’t make big profits for foreign companies.
The Chinese word ‘Shanzhai’ literally means small mountain village, but it's now used to describe fake products that have names similar to famous brands. It became an accepted name for fake goods after ‘Shanzhai Cellphones’ produced by small individual workshops in southern China became popular in the mainland market in the late 2000s. [Source: Xinhua, China Daily, December 30, 2008]
this is the root cause. the reason there is so much copying is because the chinese views that if 90% of labor to make a dvd player sits in china, and that in the reality they have to pay 90% of the profit in licensing fees then the chinese are loosing out. There is even legislative movement going on in china to make discourage licensing from overseas license holders by force patenting and trademarking in china first (the infamous indigenous innovation act). So my point about china isn't a general issue, it is very specific to the conversation imho.
I am convinced that brands which are the most copied by Chinese firms are the ones that also benefit the most from the country ... Think about benefits that Apple makes using the cheap labor, or Louis Vuitton's revenue on the Chinese market....
I' even close to thinking that being so much copied and widespread, the fake even contribute to the popularity of the original
Those copied PCB bring little to no prejudice to Nelson and co. because the DIY market does not compete with his commercial products... They are not targeted at the same targets...
Most of these designs are probably not even patented on the Chinese territory to begin with... Technically there is nothing legally wrong with it
Then you talk about "morality" and I can't help but thinking about how moral were the "agreements" signed between China and the west after the opium Wars...
I am a European living in China, and I have only recently realized how our westerners minds are actually like diodes working in only one direction....
I' even close to thinking that being so much copied and widespread, the fake even contribute to the popularity of the original
Those copied PCB bring little to no prejudice to Nelson and co. because the DIY market does not compete with his commercial products... They are not targeted at the same targets...
Most of these designs are probably not even patented on the Chinese territory to begin with... Technically there is nothing legally wrong with it
Then you talk about "morality" and I can't help but thinking about how moral were the "agreements" signed between China and the west after the opium Wars...
I am a European living in China, and I have only recently realized how our westerners minds are actually like diodes working in only one direction....
Interesting/entertaining discussion...
In general, there is IP theft: actually stealing documents, source code, etc and then there is protection of on "open implementation of an idea". If you don't write a patent and pay all the fees, then you cannot be protected by the law. Even if you have the patents but did not try to enforce it (pay the lawyers, etc), you can still loose that protection afforded by the law.
Even writing a patent has specific requirements. You have to write down on paper what is it that you have invented. The patent office may for example reject your implementation for being either "obvious" or "non inventive", even if you spend your whole tweaking it. On the other hand, the patent office may grant a patent to someone for "inventing" something out of a mental exercise.
When you get familiar with the laws, you can use many ways to "design" around them and all big companies do that.
Some large companies openly violate ip/copyright lawa and wait for the legal teams to hit them. They still make more money that way because they can get to the market faster
In general, there is IP theft: actually stealing documents, source code, etc and then there is protection of on "open implementation of an idea". If you don't write a patent and pay all the fees, then you cannot be protected by the law. Even if you have the patents but did not try to enforce it (pay the lawyers, etc), you can still loose that protection afforded by the law.
Even writing a patent has specific requirements. You have to write down on paper what is it that you have invented. The patent office may for example reject your implementation for being either "obvious" or "non inventive", even if you spend your whole tweaking it. On the other hand, the patent office may grant a patent to someone for "inventing" something out of a mental exercise.
When you get familiar with the laws, you can use many ways to "design" around them and all big companies do that.
Some large companies openly violate ip/copyright lawa and wait for the legal teams to hit them. They still make more money that way because they can get to the market faster
Especially French minds
Haha!
Reminds me of that quote from Austin Powers....
"There's only two things I hate in this world. People who are intolerant of other people's cultures, .... and the Dutch"
Haha!
Reminds me of that quote from Austin Powers....
"There's only two things I hate in this world. People who are intolerant of other people's cultures, .... and the Dutch"
Guys: Let's end the political sniping as funny as it may be.Sy I understand the point you've been making through your posts and its valid. I would not sell counterfeits or cheat myself, but I know others do and I don't necessarily agree with it.
If we go back to boards, guys here get permission to sell boards for non profit. Some make a few bucks some don't. If I buy boards from someone that I know is profiting from someones work on Diyaudio then am I an accessory to theft? I suspect that some of the Chinese knockers are nothing more than hypocrites.
You forgot student D who read something a bloke on the internet wrote on a forum that said 'copying is stealing' so he proceeds to loot student B's apartment because he also read in the bible when he was at Sunday School 'an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth'.
The possibilites are truly endless
Now,
A guy publishes a circuit on diyaudio.com (big thanks to him for his altruism)
Situation A: a bunch of diyers see the interesting design on diyaudio.com , they make a PCB design with Eagle, pay 10 dollars to a company (wherever it's located) for making PCBs. (the guys could be individuals or a group of people making a group buy..)
Situation B: a company makes PCBs from a design seen on diyaudio.com and sells them on eBay for 10 dollars to diyers.
It seems to me that everybody is saying situation A is fine (sharing designs and ideas is the purpose of the website anyway...), but situation B is more objectionable.
It seems to me:
- There's no profit difference for PCB maker between the 2 situations.
- There will not be any more boards sold than the DIY population is willing to build.
So what's the problem with situation B? How is it fundamentally or morally different towards the inventer?
A guy publishes a circuit on diyaudio.com (big thanks to him for his altruism)
Situation A: a bunch of diyers see the interesting design on diyaudio.com , they make a PCB design with Eagle, pay 10 dollars to a company (wherever it's located) for making PCBs. (the guys could be individuals or a group of people making a group buy..)
Situation B: a company makes PCBs from a design seen on diyaudio.com and sells them on eBay for 10 dollars to diyers.
It seems to me that everybody is saying situation A is fine (sharing designs and ideas is the purpose of the website anyway...), but situation B is more objectionable.
It seems to me:
- There's no profit difference for PCB maker between the 2 situations.
- There will not be any more boards sold than the DIY population is willing to build.
So what's the problem with situation B? How is it fundamentally or morally different towards the inventer?
Very well said.
And the minute you publish a schematics, you have given up any exclusive rights to legally.
It is naive to think that it will not be copied. It will.
So if you want to prevent people copying your design, don't publish.
Or you offer PCBs, kits, and what not your own at a price that no one will buy elsewhere.
Patrick
And the minute you publish a schematics, you have given up any exclusive rights to legally.
It is naive to think that it will not be copied. It will.
So if you want to prevent people copying your design, don't publish.
Or you offer PCBs, kits, and what not your own at a price that no one will buy elsewhere.
Patrick
Interesting debate.
Has anyone actually read the OP's question - "Why battle with Chinese board manufacturers?"?
Nobody's battling them - as in the moment you try to take legal action, you either face an invincible barrier in the form of the local laws (or lackof) or they just close down and pop up again with a different site/ebay id.
They allow us DIYers to get proto boards cheap. Now for work, I hate them due to quality issues but that's a different story.
So the question is moot. I'm wondering why I typed this...
Has anyone actually read the OP's question - "Why battle with Chinese board manufacturers?"?
Nobody's battling them - as in the moment you try to take legal action, you either face an invincible barrier in the form of the local laws (or lackof) or they just close down and pop up again with a different site/ebay id.
They allow us DIYers to get proto boards cheap. Now for work, I hate them due to quality issues but that's a different story.
So the question is moot. I'm wondering why I typed this...
If you want top quality, then you should buy the original equipment from Pass (or whoever else).
But then you don't want to, which is why you DIY all these famous designs.
(I don't DIY someone else's design any more for the last 4 years, but that's irrelevant.)
It is still a a very fair world. You get what you pay for.
If you want perfection, it comes at a cost (even made in China).
Patrick
.
But then you don't want to, which is why you DIY all these famous designs.
(I don't DIY someone else's design any more for the last 4 years, but that's irrelevant.)
It is still a a very fair world. You get what you pay for.
If you want perfection, it comes at a cost (even made in China).
Patrick
.
Last edited:
When is everyone going to take on board that as soon as you let anything out onto the digital domain of the internet it will be fair game for anyone to do whatever they like with. If you do not want it copied then do not publish it on an open forum of any sort.
Look what happened to music!
In an interview with a group of young teenage kids recently they were asked "what is the absolute minimum that you would pay to download a piece of music"?
The answer was "nothing, zilch, zero"
Technology seemingly always developes faster than our ability to understand how it will change our world, and humans being inately ingenious at using new areas in technology to explore will always outwit those that want to protect their intellectual property.
It always was and always will be a game of "cat and mouse" its just that now the board is worldwide and the rules are being re-written by the individual players.
Look what happened to music!
In an interview with a group of young teenage kids recently they were asked "what is the absolute minimum that you would pay to download a piece of music"?
The answer was "nothing, zilch, zero"
Technology seemingly always developes faster than our ability to understand how it will change our world, and humans being inately ingenious at using new areas in technology to explore will always outwit those that want to protect their intellectual property.
It always was and always will be a game of "cat and mouse" its just that now the board is worldwide and the rules are being re-written by the individual players.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.