Unfair Competition

[broadway3000]

The only way to stop it is to quite buying their cheap junk and buy USA. Its hard to find sometimes but my experience is when you buy china stuff even if it looks good it's just like good china plates through it away when your done because it is junk.

 

[sparc]

We don't get all the laws we need, we get all the laws money can buy.

Now THAT is a good signature line, and very true.

 

[texasjohn]

thanks for posting the link to that thread...contrary to rumors, it has not vanished. Your posts in that forum were excellent.

Also contrary to rumors, post 212 in the thread clearly states that he intends to apply for US patent because Chinese patents are not enforced. If granted, then his products would be unique if sold in US markets. He admits that many Chinese companies do copy products and are his competitors but does NOT say his company is doing so or plans to do so

He also gives sensitive insight into the environmental and living standards in China which obviously are much worse than those in NC or any other state yet they approach the level of extreme need postulated in post 5 of this thread as justification for extreme measures which might be taken by US citizens/workers.

Seems to me that this Pandora's Box was opened by our late disgraced President Nixon when he visited and opened trade with China.

Point is, I think our TBN member from China has been forthcoming and honest about his company and country, admitting to the unfair competition encouraged by their tax structure and his loathing of poor quality products and respect for the US patent system. What more can one human do to participate, properly, in this forum

http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/...276814-jack-china-tractor-factory-say-23.html

I was active in the forum the OP refers to, and tried to gently suggest to the new member from China that saying one
"copies" other products is considered cheating, and no one wants to buy from a cheater. He seemed to understand that very well.
And his comment back something to the effect of "China not too worried over patents" is the understatement of the year.

there is a huge population of the world that cannot afford anything but the lowest priced consumer products. Third world emerging countries, many in Africa, are a huge new market. I'm not worried about China not finding enough markets, just don't sell copies in our market, and if you want our respect, don't sell them anywhere.

 

[daveshoot]

Seems to me that this Pandora's Box was opened by our late disgraced President Nixon when he visited and opened trade with China.

I liked your post.

In the context of the times, the China opening was seen as better than thermo-nuclear World War III. Between Nixon and Reagan, we don't hear nearly as much about that as we used to. For folks who grew up with only Norks and jihadis to worry about, know that the world is arguably and temporarily a slightly safer place than it was in the Dr. Strangelove era.

Anyway the previous Pandora's box was opened by Commodore Perry. Now Japanese product (about which all these same complaints were common in the 60s and 70s) is the gold standard of quality. Most of their actual production is in -duh- China and other Asian countries with lower costs of production. They just design and make phone calls in Japan any more.

And so turns the screw of competition. The ball is in our court. Protectionism is a reaction, not a solution. I hate patent infringement as much as anyone and that is one thing we can enforce domestically, if we choose to... but it's still not really a solution to yer global economic revolution.

 

[daugen]

this issue has been on my mind. First, I like Jack Yuan and have privately messaged him my encouragement.
So unlike the one member who called Jack a troll and basically a fraud, I've taken the man at face value and word. And
must continually remind myself that he is in a country that has almost always played by their own rules. Also most of their
population are farmers. Who are not wealthy, often poor, who often would benefit greatly from inexpensive basic farm equipment.
It's the blatant copying part that Jack seems to fully understand is a real issue. He gets it. End of story. No need to pile on.

Which leads me to my second concern. I own a variety of compact tractor plows, as do many of you. A pretty heavy single share plow, a light potato plow, and a super heavy duty subsoiler, likely the only one made in the US. The subsoiler, for example, could be duplicated in a home forge with the right materials. It's really simple, uncomplicated machinery. Slabs of steel and small hardware. And welding. All stuff many of us could do.
My concern is where does the line get crossed when you build your own piece of equipment for your own use, or even to resell locally?
Aren't we all allowed to make equipment for our own use? I'm clearly no patent attorney...
Can we call each plow a work of art? Paint them metallic chartreuse with a racing stripe, whatever...
Seems that making small farm equipment is a historic extension of the town's smith or forge.
Does the town blacksmith have to file for a US patent on every plow variety he builds for others in a small farming village?

My guess is he crosses the line at the resale point, where it becomes taxable commerce.
But I bet some one here actually knows, and if you own a forge, have you ever made your own small farming tools?


We must think outside of the US box to understand how it works in other countries.
I have no problem with Chinese companies wanting to sell their plows to folks in Borneo.
Or the Congo. Just don't import and sell them here without US patents to back them up.
We have plenty of home grown builders of farm equipment left, not combines, but rather small
implements. We have one about thirty miles North of me. ETA makes some of their own stuff and
is proud of it. And their prices are very reasonable. But would they be if the Chinese competition was
withdrawn? Not so sure. Competition sure does take the fat out of the transaction.

 

[linuxman51]

domestic companies rip each other off all the time... ford comes out with some sort of widget that becomes wildly popular, so GM "designs" something similar with a new name.. kinda begs the question about prior art and extent..

patent law in this country is probably used for as much bad as it is good, maybe more so.. you've got tech companies suing each other because of the 'shape' of a device that's supposed to fit in your hand.. not a lot of options there really, but hey let's lawyer up and see whose pockets are deeper... Bio tech is another similar realm... we as a country (US) are so patent crazy that you as an individual now no longer own your own gene sequence.

I think there is something fundamentally wrong with that. I'm not saying people don't have a right to gain from their inventiveness/hard work but so few people are reasonable about things anymore..

cat's outa the bag on the global economy, so yall might as well bury your tears about days gone by and figure out how to best operate going forward. Competition is always a good thing.. it drives innovation forward, tends keeps prices (more) reasonable, and gives you choices.

 

[joshuabardwell]

We must think outside of the US box to understand how it works in other countries. I have no problem with Chinese companies wanting to sell their plows to folks in Borneo. Or the Congo. Just don't import and sell them here without US patents to back them up.

I think there's a flip-side to this philosophy that deserves mentioning. I don't expect to come to any resolution, just to point out that there's another perspective. The USA is incredibly protective of intellectual property, but we shouldn't just take as a fact that that's the best way to be, from the perspective of encouraging innovation or healthy markets. The reason we're so protective is that there are a relatively few, huge, rich players in the market, that have slowly ratcheted up intellectual property protections (patents, trademarks, and copyrights) until they are far, far more broadly applicable than they were originally intended to be. One good example is that many patents seem to be issued despite them failing to meet the "obviousness" standard--e.g. this is an actual patent that was granted on a method swinging sideways on a swing, instead of front-to-back. Another example is how patents and copyright are regularly extended far past the limited period of exclusivity that they were originally intended to grant. In short, let's not forget that a competitive marketplace is a healthy marketplace, and a marketplace with over-reliance on government-granted monopolies results in entrenched players squashing innovation while offering sub-par quality and service. If China is an example of a country with inadequate IP protection, then I submit that the US is an example of a country with excessive IP protection.

 

[aczlan]

Another example is how patents and copyright are regularly extended far past the limited period of exclusivity that they were originally intended to grant. In short, let's not forget that a competitive marketplace is a healthy marketplace, and a marketplace with over-reliance on government-granted monopolies results in entrenched players squashing innovation while offering sub-par quality and service. If China is an example of a country with inadequate IP protection, then I submit that the US is an example of a country with excessive IP protection.

I agree. I think our system is fairly good, but there should be more done with regards to checking for prior work and a shorter period protection.

Aaron Z

 

[jinman]

So, what kind of "attachment" is a Tesla? Can you drag it behind a John Deere like a boxblade? Why does the OP think his rant against NC belong in the Attachment forums of TBN? Is it because he is looking for "location, location, location" to vent his whine where it will get the most views? A Chinese member talking about his farming and agricultural products might belong here, but I have serious doubts that any useful information about attachments will be gleaned in this thread about Tesla automobiles.

Personally, if you can afford a Tesla, you can afford the airfare to go to California and buy yourself one. Then you can drive it home through rural America and watch all those real people using their real attachments on their tractors.

 

[dave1949]

Open source software is an interesting business model. Due to the cost and unlikelihood of preventing the copying of software, anyone can access the program code. The money is made by selling service, support and customization to those who decide they will depend on the product enough to make it worth protecting their operations.