Landwind X7 - nice!
Discussion
hornetrider said:
Really quite fancy one of these, and only 14k. Bargain.
http://www.autoblog.com/2014/11/22/land-rover-land...
See the yellow car at the back? I actually prefer the back light treatment to Gerry McGovern/Victoria Beckham's effort.http://www.autoblog.com/2014/11/22/land-rover-land...
Clivey said:
So; what do we think is the (long term) future re. China and copyright?
Interesting one. They do not give a single toss for other nations' copyright.I have been wondering if the best thing to do might be to avoid lawsuits and make infomercials instead taking on the Chinese rip-offs head to head. Probably don't be too honest about things (since the Chinese are no strangers to bad ethics themselves) and just go all Top Gear and show door cars falling off the Land Wind, or it getting stuck mounting a high kerb, skidding and crashing in to a tree trying to follow an Evoque round a corner etc. Whatever it takes to make the Land Wind or indeed any of their knock-offs look ridiculous, undesirable and altogether the wrong car to be seen in in China - and make sure the Chinese market are bombarded with it.
There's a lot of hate for the Evoque - it's not a car I'd want myself, but it is a home-grown product employing a lot of people living in the UK as is Jaguar Land Rover in general. I know it's more fashionable in Britain to aspire to live sausage side, but fighting Chinese copyright theft is in the interests of the economy of our own country.
Even the German fetishists should be anti-Chinese copyright theft, since they habitually rip off BMW and Mercedes products too.
Wonder if this, after 5 years' use, will be as horrifically rotten as the X5 clone was?
http://www.carscoops.com/2014/10/watch-german-owne...
http://www.carscoops.com/2014/10/watch-german-owne...
jamieduff1981 said:
Interesting one. They do not give a single toss for other nations' copyright.
Resurrecting this thread 'coz I just read this rather interesting article on the subject. We are all too quick to jump to conclusions regarding Chinese piracy, but it seems in this case JLR have no-one to blame but themselves. The law is clear on patents and copyrights in China - rights holders have up to 6 months from displaying or publicising a design to apply for a patent - and JLR quite simply missed their deadline for submitting the patent application.The law is actually phrased to permit retrospective applications to protect someone where they have displayed a design and then someone else attempts to copy it and lodge an application ahead of the original designer within that 6 month window.
We are all rather quick to judge, but this is a product of JLR's ignorance of Chinese law rather than the Chinese lawlessness a lot of us jumped to assume! The process for obtaining copyright protection may be different to other territories, but it does exist. Had JLR's lawyers done their homework before they ventured into an unknown market they would have know the procedure and would have received the same protection as any other part of the world.
Edited by r11co on Wednesday 22 April 14:17
r11co said:
Resurrecting this thread 'coz I just read this rather interesting article on the subject. We are all too quick to jump to conclusions regarding Chinese piracy, but it seems in this case JLR have no-one to blame but themselves. The law is clear on patents and copyrights in China - rights holders have up to 6 months from displaying or publicising a design to apply for a patent - and JLR quite simply missed their deadline for submitting the patent application.
The law is actually phrased to permit retrospective applications to protect someone where they have displayed a design and then someone else attempts to copy it and lodge an application ahead of the original designer within that 6 month window.
We are all rather quick to judge, but this is a product of JLR's ignorance of Chinese law rather than the Chinese lawlessness a lot of us jumped to assume! The process for obtaining copyright protection may be different to other territories, but it does exist. Had JLR's lawyers done their homework before they ventured into an unknown market they would have know the procedure and would have received the same protection as any other part of the world.
So it's LR's fault for not protecting it and it's ok to rip the design off...The law is actually phrased to permit retrospective applications to protect someone where they have displayed a design and then someone else attempts to copy it and lodge an application ahead of the original designer within that 6 month window.
We are all rather quick to judge, but this is a product of JLR's ignorance of Chinese law rather than the Chinese lawlessness a lot of us jumped to assume! The process for obtaining copyright protection may be different to other territories, but it does exist. Had JLR's lawyers done their homework before they ventured into an unknown market they would have know the procedure and would have received the same protection as any other part of the world.
Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 22 April 14:17
The Chinese are always doing it, patent or not. It's all great until what they make falls apart and you need some help. Anyone who was going to by a genuine car wouldn't look twice at this piece of crap.
yonex said:
So it's LR's fault for not protecting it and it's ok to rip the design off...
The Chinese are always doing it, patent or not. It's all great until what they make falls apart and you need some help. Anyone who was going to by a genuine car wouldn't look twice at this piece of crap.
They've also ripped off the new F-35 fighter and any other bit of new military hardware they think will be worth it.The Chinese are always doing it, patent or not. It's all great until what they make falls apart and you need some help. Anyone who was going to by a genuine car wouldn't look twice at this piece of crap.
yonex said:
So it's LR's fault for not protecting it and it's ok to rip the design off..
It absolutely is! Patent filing laws exist in this country too and there are plenty of documented UK cases of of patent disputes because someone failed to lodge a design before going public with it.And as I said, in some ways the Chinese laws offer more protection as the patents can be lodged retrospectively even once the design has been revealed. The procedure was there, the procedure was transparent. JLR didn't follow it - their fault entirely.
yonex said:
The Chinese are always doing it, patent or not. It's all great until what they make falls apart and you need some help. Anyone who was going to by a genuine car wouldn't look twice at this piece of crap.
That is a separate argument, but by all means conflate the two issues if it makes you feel righteous, but the fact remains China is eating the industrial establishments' lunch because they just aren't clever enough to compete. JLR will start no legal proceedings against Landwind over the X7 because they know they have already lost, not because of an injustice, but because of their ignorance of the laws of a country they thought they could exploit.Edited by r11co on Wednesday 22 April 15:18
Is it just a developing world/eastern thing?
I know Russians for instance who take enormous pride in buying fake watches and handbags and whatever and boast about how some £10 Rolex knock off from the market is just like a real one (when it just isn't).
I just would feel very embarrassed to drive around in that and I really like the Evoque.
I know Russians for instance who take enormous pride in buying fake watches and handbags and whatever and boast about how some £10 Rolex knock off from the market is just like a real one (when it just isn't).
I just would feel very embarrassed to drive around in that and I really like the Evoque.
r11co said:
That is a separate argument, but by all means conflate the two issues if it makes you feel righteous, but the fact remains China is eating the industrial establishments' lunch because they just aren't clever enough to compete. JLR will start no legal proceedings against Landwind over the X7 because they know they have already lost, not because of an injustice, but because of their ignorance of the laws of a country they thought they could exploit.
There's nothing clever about copying someone's work using cheap labour and components. LR don't need to sue the copy is just that. The rub is when you visit China the average business owner wouldn't touch Chinese equipment, cars, or tech. Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 22 April 15:18
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff