Landwind X7 - nice!

Author
Discussion

HertsBiker

6,300 posts

270 months

Monday 24th November 2014
quotequote all
I don't like the original, but for 14k I'd consider one. The wife loves it.

soad

32,825 posts

175 months

Monday 24th November 2014
quotequote all
Mark-C said:
Am I the only person that read the title and was disappointed not to see some sort of Suzuki two stroke knock off?
You clearly are! hehe

Bodo

12,368 posts

265 months

Monday 24th November 2014
quotequote all
We always hear the Chinese are copying, but that's not true.

They released the Lifang 320 over five years ago.


And BMW now comes up with this:

Wish

1,256 posts

248 months

Monday 24th November 2014
quotequote all
My wife has her Evoque for just over 2 weeks. Just pushed over £40k told her not to buy one. Does nothing for me.
However I've got this urge now to change the ranger rover badges for LAND WIND badges lol

S3000

511 posts

158 months

Monday 24th November 2014
quotequote all
yes very nice..

wildcat45

8,056 posts

188 months

Monday 24th November 2014
quotequote all
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.

Clivey

5,108 posts

203 months

Monday 24th November 2014
quotequote all
So; what do we think is the (long term) future re. China and copyright?

Hoofy

76,253 posts

281 months

Monday 24th November 2014
quotequote all
yonex said:
Great.

How does it perform in a crash test?
Like butter through a hot knife.

Mark-C

5,007 posts

204 months

Monday 24th November 2014
quotequote all
soad said:
Mark-C said:
Am I the only person that read the title and was disappointed not to see some sort of Suzuki two stroke knock off?
You clearly are! hehe
biggrin



skyrover

12,668 posts

203 months

Monday 24th November 2014
quotequote all
I bet it's more reliable than the original

DUMBO100

1,878 posts

183 months

Monday 24th November 2014
quotequote all
I'd always thought the Evoque was a fashion accessory, so this must be like a fake Mulbery handbag. It's also a bit under wheeled to cut it as a Chelsea Tractor.

carinaman

21,211 posts

171 months

Tuesday 25th November 2014
quotequote all
r11co said:
maffski said:
So the OP created a knock off from an existing popular topic...
hehe
rofl

jamieduff1981

8,022 posts

139 months

Tuesday 25th November 2014
quotequote all
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.

Jonny_

4,108 posts

206 months

Tuesday 25th November 2014
quotequote all
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...


r11co

6,244 posts

229 months

Wednesday 22nd April 2015
quotequote all
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

anonymous-user

53 months

Wednesday 22nd April 2015
quotequote all
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.

Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 22 April 14:17
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.

Uncle John

4,269 posts

190 months

Wednesday 22nd April 2015
quotequote all
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.

r11co

6,244 posts

229 months

Wednesday 22nd April 2015
quotequote all
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

RobinBanks

17,540 posts

178 months

Wednesday 22nd April 2015
quotequote all
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.

anonymous-user

53 months

Wednesday 22nd April 2015
quotequote all
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.

Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 22 April 15:18
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.