Patenting a stolen design?!

[Harry P.]

So not only are the Chinese literally stealing designs from other automakers, but they're actually patenting them and calling them their own!

http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2014/05/06/china-chevy-colorado-clone/?intcmp=features

http://www.leftlanenews.com/landwind-e32.html

[DonW]

Pretty shabby but quite a few other far eastern 'motor manufacturers' do similar things. Perhaps the original designers should be flattered!

[Matt Bacon]

I doubt they're actually trying to patent a copy of an Evoque... even if the story says the drawings leaked "from a patent office". You can't "patent" a design, only an "innovation", which, since the design already exists as the Evoque, this pretty clearly isn't. The drawings might be lodged with the patent office to support some genuine "innovation" in the technology, though who can guess what that might be? You can apply copyright, if the thing's an "artwork", but car designs aren't. And you can create a "registered design" (like the Rolls Royce or Jeep radiators) which you can then protect (that's what Apple did with the iPad, hence the lawsuits with Samsung). Otherwise, all JLR can do is complain if the Chinese company makes any attempt to "pass off" their product as a Land Rover vehicle. It's not infringing anything to copy, more or less closely, a design that isn't registered -- otherwise Aston Martin would be having words with Ford about the front end design of all their recent mass market cars...

bestest,

M.

Edited May 11, 2014 by Matt Bacon

[Craig Irwin]

Stealing designs is nothing new in the far east, but patenting them is a new development. Who showed the Japanese how to build motorcycles? This account has been white washed, the true story is out there.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rikuo_Motorcycle

[Ace-Garageguy]

One of the problems with doing business with the Chinese...for a long time...has been their failure to recognize Western patents. Most Western countries considered civilized have reciprocal patent agreements that tend to limit infringement, even if patents are not formally filed in other countries. But if you send anything to China to have it made, good luck protecting your intellectual property rights. There's no way.

The only limiting factor is that it's going to be legally dicey trying to sell anything made under bogus Chinese design theft in any country that recognizes the legitimacy of real patents. But there are ways around that too, and this I know from firsthand experience.

And to Matt...sorry mate, but you CAN patent a design. It's called, surprisingly enough, a "design patent".

I've been all through this minefield years ago, and lost a bundle due to some tooling work on a hammer handle I designed being subbed out to the Chinee. This is one of the reasons I'm so adamantly opposed to the entire concept of "offshore production" and "outsourcing" of anything to save a buck or two these days.

Edited May 11, 2014 by Ace-Garageguy

[Craig Irwin]

otherwise Aston Martin would be having words with Ford about the front end design of all their recent mass market cars...

bestest,

M.

As Ford owned Aston Martin as recently as 2007 I'd think that maybe the cars came off the same design table?

[Brizio]

I'm not surprised... When I was working as manager and optometrist/optician, the owner (he started his career selling lenses, after open a glass frame factory and a the end optic stores) of the optic stores told me that in the 80's when they start to export work and open factories in Japan, and later in China, they ship some German made equipment, at that time the best for make glasses frame, with a crew and some technician, to teach a the workers how to use these machine end eventually repair them. Later on, they start to copy those machine, and build them under different names. The quality was not like the German machine, but also the price was totally different. And because of the huge demand of glasses and frame, they sold.

This also happen on glasses and frames, I remember go to international show, where you can find all the new fashion glasses, frame from all the big company, and after you can spot company with "weird" name that sell a exactly copy of the brand one super super cheaper. I remember some Christian Dior sunglasses/mask, with black lens, and the body was black or white, that were a brand new thing (in 2003) and in other stands of this show, Chinese company sell the exact copy in different colors.

[lordairgtar]

bestest,

M.

You can't "patent" a design,

Oh really? Try building a clone of a Corvette body to sell and see what happens. Maybe not officially a patent, but there are copyright laws as well that govern such things. I learned this when doing t shirt designs for a vendor. He wanted well known cars drawn, but I could not add the scripts of the car on the body. He still got in trouble for producing Tees from GM. I didn't depict the word Chevelle or SS anywhere on the drawing but they (GM) claimed the body shape was proprietary to GM

[Matt Bacon]

US law's clearly different to European Law. There's no such thing as a "design patent" here. You can only patent something if it's new, and has an inventive or innovative element that is not "obvious to someone with knowledge and experience in the subject", and it can be made or used in some kind of industry.

What you seem to be talking about is called a "registered design" (which you actually do, err... register) or the "design right" -- although it's possible that if your hammer handle had some kind design innovation like an angled shaft or specially clever impact absorbing elements, it could have been eligible for a patent. Registered designs are strongly protected, unregistered design rights less so (internationally, for example). Bottom line is that if someone produces an EXACT copy, you've got some chance of stopping them, but "borrowing" the overall look and feel and general shape, not a hope. The sunglasses guys are perhaps guilty of "passing off" which means trying to get people to believe that they are actually Christian Dior. (And Christian Dior's name and logo are STRONGLY protected as "trademarks" -- which is also why you couldn't use the Corvete, Chevelle or SS names and logos on the drawings...) There's nothing to stop you building a "pretty much like a Corvette" body, or indeed to stop Corvette building (and launching) a pastiche Ferrari design on their new model...

bestest,

M.

[Ace-Garageguy]

US law's clearly different to European Law.

There's nothing to stop you building a "pretty much like a Corvette" body, or indeed to stop Corvette building (and launching) a pastiche Ferrari design on their new model...

U.S. law specifically designates "utility patents" and "design patents". Having written, applied for and been granted several of each, I just MIGHT know what I'm talking about.

As far as vehicle design knockoffs go, I don't know where you got your information, but Ferrari, among others, ACTIVELY prosecutes anyone building copies of their designs. Look up the fight between McBurnie and Ferrari for a little background.

[Matt Bacon]

..and indeed, having gone through the evaluation process for a patent application several times within my own company, I know just how high the "bar" for a patentable innovation is in the UK and Europe...

If you want to see just how difficult it is to copy a car _design_ (not using name, logo etc, and not passing it off as real) for commercial sale, just check here:

http://www.totalheadturners.com/carsforsale.php?type=Kit

bestest,

M.

[Ace-Garageguy]

If you want to see just how difficult it is to copy a car _design_ (not using name, logo etc, and not passing it off as real) for commercial sale, just check here:

http://www.totalheadturners.com/carsforsale.php?type=Kit

bestest,

M.

Irrelevant. Contrary to the popular perception, having a patent or trademark or copyright does not give blanket automatic protection from infringement or copying. There are NO patent police, NO trademark police, and only rarely does the US FBI make good on the threat at the lead in of motion pictures and prosecute criminal infringement of copyright.

What a patent or trademark or copyright actually DOES is only to establish who has a LEGAL right under whatever law to use the described material, idea, process, design or device.

The legal owner of intellectual property must pursue infringement through the courts at the owner's cost. The cost is not borne by the patent or trademark office, and the cost of prosecuting infringement is often so high that incursions are not actively fought. This is the case with many of the older car-design knockoffs.

There are also limits on the length of time that the owner of intellectual property may keep it to himself. Currently, a utility patent in the US is only good for 20 years from the effective filing date. Design patents have a term of 14 years from the date of patent grant. After these times have elapsed, or if the recurring fees necessary to keep the patent in force are not paid and the patent becomes "abandoned", anybody or his dog may legally produce the subject described in the relevant document.

Copyright is an entirely different issue, not like comparing apples and oranges, but more like oranges and orangutans. Copyrights may be renewed by the original owner and his estate after his death. I'm not current on US copyright law at the moment.

Edited May 11, 2014 by Ace-Garageguy

[pharoah]

I get the feeling that the Chinese don't have designers. All they can do is copy.

Look at all of the guitars they make that look like American brands. I wonder how many of them have permission to do that?

[Matt Bacon]

The assertion was that Ferrari "actively prosecutes anyone building copies of their designs." They don't.

Ferrari will pursue anyone who infringes their trademark (The "Cavallino Rampante" for example), which is why the replicas are not sold with Ferrari scripts or badges. There are 30 or so "Daytona replicas" in the UK today, built by individuals and by companies. None of them have been "prosecuted by Ferrari," partly because the "design right" in the Daytona lapsed after ten years of its first assertion -- it WASN'T a "registered design"-- and partly because Ferrari have got more sense than to pursue a bunch of enthusiastic amateurs building the things out of affection for the car and the brand. Someone making a commercial business of selling "Ferrari Daytonas" with badges and logos, that _might_ be thought to be the real thing, and _might_ divert a potential Ferrari customer from buying a real one would be a different matter (that's why Ferrari don't give any support any more to the Stratos replica built on an F430 chassis, or the guy who likes his carbon P3/4s...).

One of the reasons that they protect the trademark and _brand_ so strongly is that, not only do they make a pot of money from it in licensing (though only about 10% of what they make from cars, contrary to popular belief), but in the UK and Europe at least there's a "use it or lose it" clause in TRADEMARK protection: if you don't protect your trademark by pursuing people who use it without permission, then after a while you can't protect it any more...

I don't claim to know the intellectual property law situation in the US; I'm very familiar with it in the UK and Europe. Trademark, Copyright, Design Rights and Patents are all different laws, relating to different things (and I don't know what gave you the idea that I don't know the difference between oranges and orang-utans...). Copyright doesn't apply to the design of cars; design rights do. Patents (in the UK and Europe) don't apply to the "look and feel" or "visual design" of a car; design rights do.

Companies enforce Trade Marks ruthlessly; they have to. They may try to enforce their patents, but it's expensive and has to be done separately in every jurisdiction where you hold the patent (and you have to apply separately for patents in every jurisdiction -- i.e. a US patent is not applicable in Europe). They will almost certainly defend their "registered designs" because there's a "use it or lose it" risk there as well. But fighting a battle over "design rights", even if someone produces an EXACT copy -- probably not worth it, especially if it's not for sale in the market where your design rights have some legal status.

The original question was "Can a Chinese company patent a design that looks rather like an Evoque?" Maybe they can in China (I don't know the Chinese intellectual property situation). But the only thing that JLR could get them on would be either infringing their trade mark (The Land Rover name or logo) or, if it's an IDENTICAL copy, sold in European markets, then they _might_ be able to challenge on the basis of design rights, as long as they are less than ten years old when they do so. The makers of a vehicle that "looks really quite a lot like an Evoque" don't have a lot to worry about...

bestest,

M.

Edited May 11, 2014 by Matt Bacon

[Matt Bacon]

I get the feeling that the Chinese don't have designers. All they can do is copy.

Look at all of the guitars they make that look like American brands. I wonder how many of them have permission to do that?

Well... all the Chinese technology companies that I deal with have designers. They're nice guys -- usually pretty young and enthusiastic art school types, like designers anywhere. Their problem is that they come from a culture with aesthetic ideals that for thousands of years have been different from the Western world. I look at some of the things that they've come up with that have been very successful in their home markets, and I think -- "bleurgh". They're under pressure to design products that work in European markets, and the easiest thing to do is too take inspiration from something that already works... so they "borrow" or "copy". And that's the thing -- they don't NEED permission to build something that looks quite a lot like a Stratocaster. They'll be in trouble if they design an EXACT copy, and call it a "Femder Stratocastr" in nice script, but that's about it...

bestest,

M.

[sjordan2]

Ferrari has most definitely actively prosecuted infringements. The Daytona Spyder Miami Vice 1:1 no longer sports a Ferrari badge, or can be identified as even a F****** replica on eBay, and the Ostermeier GTO is gone because of that. Others have been scared off because they are so litigious.

[Matt Bacon]

I didn't say that Ferrari don't pursue infringements. I said that they don't "actively prosecute anyone building copies..." They went after some people, but not everyone. Depends on who was doing it, why, and what Ferrari thought the threat to their business might be...

The guys of the "Italian Replica Car Club" don't seem too concerned:

http://www.italianreplicacarclub.co.uk/www.italianreplicacarclub.co.uk/info.php?p=2

bestest,

M

[Ace-Garageguy]

I get the feeling that the Chinese don't have designers. All they can do is copy.

There was a time when much the same thing could have been said of the Japanese. Many of their products that weren't sufficiently Westernized looked odd to our eyes, but their design sense has matured and developed with a lot of co-operative cross-pollination among cultures, to everyone's benefit. The same thing will ultimately happen with the Chinese.

But I don't recall the Japanese producing an almost line-for line-copy of any Western vehicle, even for exclusive sale in their home market, and passing it off as their own.

Intellectual property laws exist to try to limit the essential immorality of stealing someone else's original work, whether the "someone else" is an individual artist, or a team of designers. The underlying issue is MORAL, and ETHICAL, and currently the Chinese seem to be on rather a different page than the West would like to believe it's on.

The Chinese cultural and moral differences from Western ideals may also be seen in the unfortunate fact that a tiger corpse is worth about $100,000 street value there. Parts of endangered species are used in traditional and useless medicines with NO regard for the protection of soon-to-be-extinct genes. The idiotic but culturally ingrained idea that ingesting a part of some animal imparts some of it's character to the one who ingests it, like thinking that tea made from tiger bits makes you brave, or that powder made from rhino horn makes your masculinity harder, is responsible for the widespread worldwide poaching of irreplaceable animals...animals that don't BELONG to anyone, but are part of humanity's...ALL of humanity's...heritage.

No surprise then that taking ideas, with no compensation, is common.

Edited May 11, 2014 by Ace-Garageguy

[sjordan2]

Of course, it would be interesting to know how many people have been lured to buy a $50 Rolex, Mont Blanc pen or Vuitton bag. (Problem is, I can't find any kind of refill for my $17 Mont Blanc pen, a perfect reproduction). All made guess where? These only get nabbed on occasional raids, but you can still easily get them at street vendors in NYC. Counterfeiting is everywhere, in every desirable product line.

Edited May 11, 2014 by sjordan2

[Matt Bacon]

Couldn't agree more with Bill. Though you only have to look at some of the monstrosities that Harry comes up with for the Auto ID contest to see that not ALL Chinese designers just copy Western originals...

bestest,

M.

[Mack_Mechanic]

That's some good R&D (rob and duplicate)

[Harry P.]

From what I read, apparently the Chinese are only selling their stolen designs domestically, which doesn't really affect the bottom line of the manufacturers whose designs were stolen... so they pretty much let it go. But if the idea of stealing someone else's design isn't bad enough, the fact that they are making moves to claim the designs legally is pretty outrageous. But again, I guess it's all a matter within China itself–to prevent other Chinese automakers from stealing the design from the Chinese automaker who stole it first!

You would think that country of over a billion people would have a few who could come up with an original design...

[om617]

It says even the Chinese know the diffrence and would buy the real deal if they can afford it.

The truck in the Fox article looks like Japanese truck with a bad Chevy front end. They

are so bad i would not even go so far and call it stolen design. This said people often tend

to look for similarities even if there are lots of diffrence between a and b.

[martinfan5]

As Ford owned Aston Martin as recently as 2007 I'd think that maybe the cars came off the same design table?

Ford still has a 15% stake in Aston Martin , so its very safe to say that "they" did not steal any design cues from Aston for the 2015 Mustang

[jbwelda]

yep that's what they said about the Japanese too. how did that one turn out?

and using Faux news as a source is really pushing it. just like how can you tell when a lawyer is lying?...same with the fo fo news. they rarely get it right or complete and are not shy of totally pushing an agenda. kind of like right here.

jb