And so the true motive comes out. Perhaps you would feel a bit differently if you were the manager of a chinese metal shop.... So sad how some people can't see past their own self interest. Although I also produce IP for a living, I don't feel a need to strong arm fair competition with ridiculous laws just to get ahead. Too bad for the "poor" saps who think they can live the rest of their lives on just one moment of eureka without ever lifting a finger again, I guess....

Oh, what "true motive" is that? Your version? I "don't feel a need to strong arm fair competition with ridiculous laws just to get ahead" and I don't plan on living the rest of my life "on just one moment of eureka without ever lifting a finger again." I succeed by my own ingenuity, not by copying someone else without lifting a finger. I wouldn't have any clients otherwise.

You don't know me or my motives, nor do I ever expect you to. I do suspect from your nihilistic posts here that you could care less about anyone period. You're one scary dude.

Oh, what "true motive" is that? Your version? I "don't feel a need to strong arm fair competition with ridiculous laws just to get ahead" and I don't plan on living the rest of my life "on just one moment of eureka without ever lifting a finger again." I succeed by my own ingenuity, not by copying someone else without lifting a finger. I wouldn't have any clients otherwise.

You don't know me or my motives, nor do I ever expect you to. I do suspect from your nihilistic posts here that you could care less about anyone period. You're one scary dude.

+1

From pictures I have seen in some forum, Ming cycle seem to be concentrating on strida 5 during the recent bike show. Is it true they have stop producing the strida 3. Can anyone shed some light on this.

Metal rims on the Strida 5 allow higher air pressure and thus lower resistance when riding although it feels more in hands cause every small gravel makes the bike vibrate?

Bad fakes can go either way. Some will like the concept and buy the real thing and others without testing the real thing get disappointed using the faked one and think the real one only marginally better.

Where I live the real Strida 3.2 failed to click the wheels together so it failed to roll easily in front of me cause the wheels wanted to go ways on their own. It was impossible to click them together. I put much effort into forcing them together but had to give up. So despite being original something didn't fit. Maybe the persons behind the scene in the bike shop was new to it cause the bike is not a regular bike and they maybe didn't follow instructions that well.

To me it is a moral issue too. Ideally one should not fall for buying fakes. Apart from injury due to the fake breaks down. We have had several Mountain bikes that breaks at the welded seams and that is very dangerous at high speed. So the warning to not buy fakes is true.

But if something is 6 times cheaper that could mean the original is priced too high.

Brompton here is very costly. So had Flamingo been easily avalable so I could test ride it and look at quality me maybe would have bought one.

The SmartBike me bought had a three times higher price here compared to if I had lived in England.
I could be wrong but to me it looks like a HandyBike rip off. HandyBike being the original and SmartBike the fake. There is so little that is different so I fail to see SmartBike as an original construct. To me it is a fake and a very bad one at that. Bandbrake extremely bad at breaking.

Min order: 20' container of 220pcs @ US$108/pc, FOBChina. Figure another $15/pc as a conservative est. for shipping and customs. No idea about duty on importing bikes. Door to door shipping would be about 6 weeks. I bet they show up here within two months at about $200-250 on ebay.

Group buy, anyone? :rolleyes:

I wouldn't group buy some cheap rip off that will fall apart in weeks if not months. You get what you pay for....

Say...

How come a Chinese Strida knockoff takes all kinds of heat here, but everyone's super psyched about this new Brompton ripoff:

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=406181

Doesn't look quite like a brompton? Maybe a cheap knockoff place actually *gasp* developed something past just the copy and manufacture stage?

You should compare the Brompton to the Merc ...

What you see in the Flamingo is the result of a copyright infringement lawsuit.

Didn't know the lawsuit history. Still, lots of people wanting the new Flamingo, no protest about a Brompton ripoff. Because it's Taiwan rather than China maybe? Because even though the are still totally ripping off the concept it is changed enoug to conform to IP law?

Oh, what "true motive" is that? Your version? I "don't feel a need to strong arm fair competition with ridiculous laws just to get ahead" and I don't plan on living the rest of my life "on just one moment of eureka without ever lifting a finger again." I succeed by my own ingenuity, not by copying someone else without lifting a finger. I wouldn't have any clients otherwise.

You don't know me or my motives, nor do I ever expect you to. I do suspect from your nihilistic posts here that you could care less about anyone period. You're one scary dude.

All I know is what you told me. You said you're passionately endorse IP restrictions because you're an architect. If that isn't being motivated by self interest then what is?

I get it, you support strong IP restrictions because it's better for your wallet. Fair enough. Please understand, however, that some of us are more concerned with the underlying moral issues.

How come a Chinese Strida knockoff takes all kinds of heat here, but everyone's super psyched about this new Brompton ripoff

Most of the heat seems to be coming from an overly vocal minority. Why they've decided to latch onto this particular case is a mystery to me.

Didn't know the lawsuit history. Still, lots of people wanting the new Flamingo, no protest about a Brompton ripoff. Because it's Taiwan rather than China maybe? Because even though the are still totally ripping off the concept it is changed enoug to conform to IP law?

There were similar complaints about Merc since it was, for all intents and purposes, a precise copy of an older Brompton model.

EDIT: I should point out that Merc and Flamingo are somewhat distinct in their appearance. Merc and the old Brompton model are very difficult to visually distinguish.

EDIT: I should point out that Merc and Flamingo are somewhat distinct in their appearance. Merc and the old Brompton model are very difficult to visually distinguish.

The older model of Flamingo (under another name maybe?) was much more similar to a classic Brompton than this newer design. Apparently, based on your comment, there was a lawsuit which forced the change?

If you look around the Flamingo site, you'll also find another folder that looks an awful lot like Dahons from just a couple years ago. Could also be that Flamingo (Grace Gallant Ent. Co. Ltd.) is stealing Pacific Cycles's business plan as well...

The older model of Flamingo (under another name maybe?) was much more similar to a classic Brompton than this newer design. Apparently, based on your comment, there was a lawsuit which forced the change?

Just speculation on my part. I do know that Brompton won its copyright case in Europe and that it did not immediately apply to Britain.

All I know is what you told me. You said you're passionately endorse IP restrictions because you're an architect. If that isn't being motivated by self interest then what is?

I get it, you support strong IP restrictions because it's better for your wallet. Fair enough. Please understand, however, that some of us are more concerned with the underlying moral issues....

You don't seem to read very well but you do like to extract your own distorted conclusions from what you read and project them as fact. So be it, you are the champ there - go forth and copy the ideas of others verbatim without a guilty conscience if you feel that is progress. I almost choked when I read you feel concerned with moral issues....

I suspect the knock offs are produced by the actual manufacturers.

Substituting cheap parts (wheels saddle), not inspecting, requiring the buyer to tune up the bike after sale, accepting small defects, and not have any support or warrenty could knock the price of the bike down by more than half.

I see Strida 8 on ebay for $700 from Korea.

If Strida wants to maintain it's market position they should design an 8 speed hub for it. I doubt any other hub for a 'half' fork will every be made so they will have their monopoly back. If they wanted to be wacky they could put the IG hub in the BB.

Strida is a brand name. The manufacturer is Ming Cycles of Taiwan. The knock-offs are from mainland China from unknown manufacturer(s). Ming Cycles does continue to improve the Strida - many of the changes from 3.2 to 5.0 originated in-house there. They may currently be working on a hub design to accommodate a Schlumpf Speed-Drive for a future Strida model. This kind of innovation is driven by customer feedback, not the knock-off competition. I don't see anything new being developed by the knock-offs. The letter below is an example of Schlumpf and Ming Cycles collaboration:

Subject: Re: Can speed-drive be installed on Strida?
Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2008 23:10:03 +0100
From: schlumpf innovations <info>
To: Amuro Lee <amurolee>

Dear Amuro,

we sent a speed-drive to Strida and are waiting for their results. They told
me a few weeks ago, that they are working on a solution.

Best regards

Florian

Hello everyone ;)
My friends are all here !! Good to see you, Amuro and Weakling. How do you do? :-)

This topic seems hot. My opinion is simple about this matter.
---
There are two kinds of skillful manufacturers on this planet;
1. worry about feeling guilty
2. worry about feeling shame
---

It's interesting to see what strong reactions this topic raises. To me it's fairly simple:

There are laws on trademarks, patents, copyright, and design rights. Any or all of these rightsmay be broken by "copy" bicycles. The legal issues are usually complex so that only those directly involved will be sure of the facts. Just because a bicycle looks like something familiar doesn't necessarily make it illegal. If it is then it's up to those affected to take action. It is up to us to calmly report it for their attention.

My biggest concern is that cheap copies may be unsafe. Genuine bikes will have passed tests and achieved certification by the EU or whichever national body applies in your location. Criminals who don't care about IP rights, usually equally don't care about their customer's safety.

Finally, I really wish that those incredible talented and dilligent people in China (mostly) who make the copies would apply their talents a bit more creatively, as it would push forward the market for everyone. I know that China is gradually moving in the direction of better enforcement, but in the meantime we have to do the best we can in dealing with the counterfeits. It's very simple to report illegal auctions to Ebay for example, and if more people did so, they might take more action.

To see the amazing results of true creativity, just see what the inventor of Strida has made now!
http://www.foldingforum.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=15

Totally agree with Gary here. Very wise words.

In fact what you say applied to the Merc which is a high quality clone of the Brompton in both design and fold. An injunction was granted in the Netherlands but not in the UK. I believe this was down to the identical nature of the Merc and therefore the injunction was intendede to prevent distribution was based on copyright protection. The Merc is more unusual in that it is not inferior, no matter what Bromptonites say. It's simply a question of legal argument. Yes one can of course have views on the unashamed lack of originality in design but not in execution of quality and safety.

Interestingly the Brompton fold mechanism it out of patent and would seem difficult to defend on copyright look alone across various jurisdictions. In fact Grace Gallant Enterprises of Taiwan is applying the Brompton style folding mechanism across their range of new folders. Aside from the folding technique the new bikes from GG look different and have different components.

The Strida itself may also be out of patent but it is the intention of the Chinese manufacturers to confuse the brands, use Strida's very own photos and marketing material and finally to produce low quality copies which also intend to deceive authorities.

The Taiwanese have improved as a manufacturing hub in electromics and bikes which shows the Greater China region is well capable of introducing top-class products that work off the fusion with Western innovations and contribute to the final user market. No better example than Pacific Bikes of Taiwan and even Grace Gallant are challenging Brompton on new hub featured 16" folders. At the end of the day brand equity and good service can still protect a well established brands like Brompton or Strida from clones anyway. Competition is good as long as its fair. A lot of the low grade companies should be rendered unviable by both more exacting quality standards and the final market. However, intellectual property protection still plays an important role in preserving the income flow of a firm's R&D invstment. The question is how long and far protection goes. The music industry is an example of consumer exploitation using IP and DRM protection, E.g. Sony BMG. I do not think Brompton are like this at all, although some question its legal pursuit of Mec in Europe. This is a very contentious issue. On the whole, Brompton feel this is room for competitors in the folding bike market and even provide a link to their rivals on their website, encouraging prospective customers to make an informed decision. I guess they just don't like identical clones regardles of quality.

Anyone who buys them is supporting intellectual property theft and cheating. I'm surprised you would even contemplate buying one. If you think the Strida 5 is overpriced then don't buy one at all. They hardly had the originality that Mark Sanders has to come up with such a concept. I'm sure the parts are inferior too in this case since they are prepared to rip off somebody elses concept.

I thought China had joined the WTO now and would crack down on companies like these. Some hope!

LOL - ya know that's a bit prim there mulleady. It's called globalisation. The Chinese can produce things at a fraction of our western costs. Granted they can do it VERY badly, but they can also do it VERY WELL too. This bike might be crap, or it might be excellent. It depends on the motives of the manufacturer. I read the same kinds of nonsense (poor quality, nasty constrcution etc) about the Merc. It has been one of the most pleasure giving posessions I ever had and the AtoB review that almost stopped me buying it is a filthy pack of lies, propagated by an irked Brompton hanger on.

All this holier than though stuff about rip-offs, seems to miss the point that even in the case of very innovative bikes, we are talking about minor re-designs of a hundred year old technology. You make a frame that holds two wheels apart and you drive one of them by cranks and pedals.

There is virtually nothing about any modern bicycle that wasn't thought up by 1910, except maybe the use of fancy new materials like carbon fibre. The bike is a very basic mechanical device and we should stop thinking and talking about them like the idea of them had just been brought to us by Martians. Every bike manufacturer relies on a hundred years of mechanical ideas and already proven technologies. What about the strida has not been done before?

The bike below has more than a passing similarity to the Strida, don't you think? New - I don't think so.




http://www.eriding.net/media/photos/transport/vintage_bikes/040930_amoore_mp_his_trans_vb_030.jpg


http://www.stridaforum.com/images/strida5%20folding%20bike.jpg

The bike below has more than a passing similarity to the Strida, don't you think? New - I don't think so.

Sorry EvilV .. But, I dont see much similarity at all !!!!

Look at the seat, the relationship to the bars, and the small back wheel. I'd claim the original safety penny farthing has features that are in the strida.

Seriously though, my point is that while modern cycle designers bring their own brain power to the table, they are mostly endlessly re-cycling earlier concepts and ideas in cosmetic ways. Ritchie and his ilk have a bloody cheek in claiming they have the right to copyright their products as he did in that Dutch court judgement. His whole product depends on the work of hundreds of bike designers and engineers, who long ago worked out how to make ALL the core technologies. Ritchie claimes that his single curved main tube is unique. Is it? I don't think so. The penny farthing above has a single curved main tube, even if it does have a rather larger front wheel.

My diatribe is really against the idea that it is such a big sin to copy a design. Leaving aside the minor arrangements of parts and particular shapes and proportions, everything important about the bicycle was invented before any of our parents were born, and most of us, before our grandparents could walk.

:)

I wouldn't group buy some cheap rip off that will fall apart in weeks if not months. You get what you pay for....

Except when you pay far too much to a smug London based manufacturer who has a following of sycophantic masochists.

Ouch ... why dont you tell us how you really feel about brompton :D

Except when you pay far too much to a smug London based manufacturer who has a following of sycophantic masochists.
ZIIIIIIIIINGGGGG!!

evilv hit it on the head. considering how much they charge for these things, its hard to justify overpaying for something that could just as fall apart in 'weeks', as their 'knock-offs'.

Who here is to say that brands lesser known than coveted brompton, or ralliegh, are going to 'fall apart in weeks'?

so is every bike that suddenly uses an A-frame design a knock-off strida? I agree that ripping off the marketing materials and not generating any of their own graphics etc etc makes for a really sour impression.

just look at the other ebay strda thread and look at my pics, that is a copy that i hope doesn't make it to north america since that one is really flimsy..

What about diamond frame bicycles? Are all these different manufacturers ripping each other off because they are all using diamond frame bikes? How about the first one to use Aluminium as a frame material...or carbon fibre? How about the first Y frame dual suspension mountain bikes? Who invented those? Should they be limited to one manufacturer?

The basis of humanity's progression is the ability to see what others have done before, learn from that , duplicate it and improve on it. Isaac Newton once said "If I have seen it further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants." He recognized that his accomplishments were brought about through lessons learned from those who came before him. It's natural for people to take what someone else ahs already done and duplicate or improve it. Should this improvement be limited to only the company that started it? Should it be limited to companies in certain countries? Strida and A-bike both used the A frame. Now Chinese manufacturers are using that design as well. Should we all start screaming that people shouldn't buy Supercycles or Huffys because they are made in China and therefore rip offs? How long does a frame design have to be around before other manufacturers are allowed to produce it?

Look at the seat, the relationship to the bars, and the small back wheel. I'd claim the original safety penny farthing has features that are in the strida.

Seriously though, my point is that while modern cycle designers bring their own brain power to the table, they are mostly endlessly re-cycling earlier concepts and ideas in cosmetic ways. Ritchie and his ilk have a bloody cheek in claiming they have the right to copyright their products as he did in that Dutch court judgement. His whole product depends on the work of hundreds of bike designers and engineers, who long ago worked out how to make ALL the core technologies. Ritchie claimes that his single curved main tube is unique. Is it? I don't think so. The penny farthing above has a single curved main tube, even if it does have a rather larger front wheel.

My diatribe is really against the idea that it is such a big sin to copy a design. Leaving aside the minor arrangements of parts and particular shapes and proportions, everything important about the bicycle was invented before any of our parents were born, and most of us, before our grandparents could walk.

:)

I understand the argument and sympathize. But part of Ritchie's argument is that "Scoop" -- as I recall the brand was called at the time -- could use the patent and maintaining its functionality without copying the appearance so closely. I recall that they even built a prototype that demonstrated the point.

Binch Shin (http://www.bikeforums.net/member.php?u=119018) Amuro Lee Garry 3001,

Thanks to all of you for standing up for laws protecting the original designer.
I see much merit in such views and I would feel guilt and shame to buy a fake
but if they are cheap enough and not dangerous then maybe my bad feelings
would give in to the practicality of owning a bike that is allowed even at rush hour
on our commuting trains and buses.

But I would prefer a Kick-Rollator to a Strida cause a Rollator one could sit on if the train or bus
are full and there is a long journey one hour trip. And the Rollator is allowed in Banks and other
fancy places cause it is an aid for elderly or challenged walkers. The Kick bike add on me think
of would be integrated in a way not jepardizing that Rollator status I hope.

Maybe Garry throw me out of the Strida forum but if there existed a Strida here locally
where I live for 100USD and brand new then I would buy it unless it was obvious very
dangerous to ride it. I would test ride it first I guess. Sorry. I do have respect for Mark
Sanders and Ming but 100$ is 100$

ZIIIIIIIIINGGGGG!!

evilv hit it on the head. considering how much they charge for these things, its hard to justify overpaying for something that could just as fall apart in 'weeks', as their 'knock-offs'.

Who here is to say that brands lesser known than coveted brompton, or ralliegh, are going to 'fall apart in weeks'?


That's just it though. I have hammered the Merc uphill and down dale for 3000 miles. I use it winter and summer - more in the summer, but certainly in all weathers including light snow. I just took it outside and photographed it for you five minutes ago. Here it is in the here and now - not prettied up - just as it is, in workaday mode.


http://lh3.ggpht.com/Volpoon/SCM_FZBCKhI/AAAAAAAAAhw/i7DCidrxOT8/DSCN1495.JPG?imgmax=512


It is very far from falling apart and my only unexpected troubles were with the original chain tensioner which didn't seem up to the job. Other problems have been minor like the few spokes that went in the early days, and that only happened because of my abuse. This bike is available now at £280 cash - not on ebay or with paypal charges, or £330 with paypal and ebay seller fees.

Ouch ... why dont you tell us how you really feel about brompton :D


:) I hope I didn't get too over the top....

I really like the Brompton design. I think they are very nice bikes. I like the steel frame too. I'd really like the raw laquer one if it had a twistgrip change, mudguards, a rack, a lighting set, a bag to carry it in and the front luggage system - oh - as long as it cost £330 and could be delivered in three days from paying on the internet.

At the time I really wanted one, they had a ludicrous waiting list - I was quoted several weeks, and the damned thing cost about six hundred pounds. I'd have paid it if they could have handed over a bike, but that isn't the way it works. I started looking for second hand ones and found the Merc. I had it within days.

I'm sure that people who have Bromptons love them. I know they do, and I'm glad for them, but if you go to the Bromptontalk Yahoo list, you'll find a right bunch of sychofantic, narcisists and masochistic overpayers who squeel with delight at the long waiting lists and high prices and convince themselves that it's all because the bike is so exclusively wonderful..... 'Beat me harder - harder and charge me double what it's worth.' :)

evilv, ur merc is looking great.
If its taken the abuse u had thrown at it and it comes back for more. U can't grin wider than that knowing it gets the job done without the shiny badge.

Its like ppl boycotting SRAM since they copy shimano. Simply rediculous.

The most obvious difference in the strida's and their illigitimate cousins is the Kenda tires. The single gear really hinders effiency, top speed and acceleration, handling when under 65psi minimum. The fakers tires only max out at 35psi or less!

My positive ownership experience with the Merc is what prompted me to look at the Strida clone. Not all clones are crap. I was impressed with the Strida clone and actually bought one for my sister (for $275). The build quality is quite good, very analogous to the Merc/Brompton comparison.

I wouldn't have bought it to give to my little sis unless I was sure. Trueno92's characterization of the Strida clone in this thread and others is very accurate, in my opinion.

To me, whether something violates intellectual property protection is very black and white. It's either legal, or it isn't. If it's legal, I'll buy it on the basis of a financial calculation. If it isn't, I won't buy it. The rest of the conversation is a moral argument. For every 10 people on Bike Forums, you'll get 12 different moral arguments. I'm old enough to decide that for myself, thank you.

My positive ownership experience with the Merc is what prompted me to look at the Strida clone. Not all clones are crap. I was impressed with the Strida clone and actually bought one for my sister (for $275). The build quality is quite good, very analogous to the Merc/Brompton comparison.

...

For every 10 people on Bike Forums, you'll get 12 different moral arguments. I'm old enough to decide that for myself, thank you.

That is good to know SC. According to where we eventually buy a house, I might look at the strida.

With regards to the second comment, I think that you are wildly underestimating the true figure. ;)

haha for me, it was buy a genuine strida, or the clone AND a weber performer BBQ.

After closely inspecting the bike, the choice was easy.

Btw, my post in the ebay thread goes more in depth than what I summarized in this thread.

The moderators are cowards.

haha for me, it was buy a genuine strida, or the clone AND a weber performer BBQ.
Or you could have gotten a genuine Strida and a clone Weber...? ;)

Unfortunately this is a rather utopian position based on, it seems, the assumption that if something is available for purchase, it is "legal". How do you know the clone you bought was legal? "Legal" can be determined only after very costly litigation. The infinged party has to have pockets deep enough to successfully withstand one's opponent's defense. Robert Kearns, inventor of the intermittent wiper, took decades to get judgements against the patent infringements by the big three automakers. There are illegal copies of DVDs, etc., sold all the time, through traditional outlets. So while you might be able to decide moral questions, I don't see how you can possible decide the legal ones. If I see a clone, I avoid it. That is how I make my decision.

It's still simple. If there is legal action, I don't buy. If there is no legal action, then it tells me that the lawyers don't feel there's a case. I suppose there's a scenario where the lawyers are thinking about suing. But even after 28 years of marriage, I'm still not a mind reader, so I don't try to behave as one.

And I'm happy you have your own rationale for making these choice.

The moderators are cowards.

It is lovely that you live in a fantasy world that you have created. It is obvious you don't have a clue of what it would take, for example, to sue importers of illegal Stridas. China does not care about IP so it would be impossible to go after the manufacturer. We all have our standards. You probably download music illegally and buy DVDs off the sidewalk, since, it is obvious to you that the lawyers see no case. It must be legal. And you have no reasoning or deductive powers, so you just buy away. Nice to have simple rules for living.

Thanks for your advice.

Now, back to our regularly scheduled programming....

Thanks for your advice.

Now, back to our regularly scheduled programming....

ah, but there are still the arguments that arise from huffy or supercycle ripping off Asia-domestic-market bikes for sale only in north america (further putting north america into that utopia :rolleyes:) and we have yet to discuss all the moral complications of using tissue and not kleenex, and all those mom's cooking with no-name-brand shake & bake chicken mix!!! how do these unfit mothers sleep at night?!?!

:deadhorse:

anyways, found out how to attach a rear 5led light to the rear rack.. $3! woot.

China does not care about IP so it would be impossible to go after the manufacturer.

Actually, according to some articles in the Economist, this is changing. Apparently, being an intellectual property lawyer in China is now quite lucrative.

EDIT: Just to make it clear, I have not been to China and don't have any special knowledge regarding what is actually happening there.

It is lovely that you live in a fantasy world that you have created. It is obvious you don't have a clue of what it would take, for example, to sue importers of illegal Stridas. China does not care about IP so it would be impossible to go after the manufacturer. We all have our standards. You probably download music illegally and buy DVDs off the sidewalk, since, it is obvious to you that the lawyers see no case. It must be legal. And you have no reasoning or deductive powers, so you just buy away. Nice to have simple rules for living.

For that matter, do you buy anything at retail, because it is, in fact, routine business for delivery trucks to park illegally and most drivers are instructed to simply take the ticket and submit it to the trucking office for payment.

There is quite obviously absolutely nothing wrong with buying knockoffs, legal or otherwise. Unfortunately, some people have been brainwashed by the incessant advertising that violations of copy restrictions is "stealing", when the fact of the matter is that it is an entirely different animal, both legally and morally.

It is nice to have simple rules for living. Excuse me for not torturing myself for eating breakfast pastries which were delivered from an illegally parked truck. Obviously, not all illegal acts have the same legal or moral implications.

. . . How long does a frame design have to be around before other manufacturers are allowed to produce it?
Design patents generally last fourteen years from the date the patent was granted. Legally that's how long others should wait before manufacturing copies.

I believe that intellectual property is worthy of protection. And in this case, when I've seen a letter written by the inventor stating that the IP was ripped off, I feel ethically compelled not to buy the copy.

That said, the ethical issue gets really complicated. How much responsibility must the consumer bear to make sure that everything he/she buys is genuine or legal and not an illegal copy? Designs and technologies are licensed every day, so it's not valid to say one should assume all copies are illegal. It's also not the consumer's job to enforce patent law. If one sees an item for sale at a much lower price than its competitor, and it is being sold through conventional channels (i.e. not off the back of a truck) how is one to know that it is an illegal copy? Are we ethically required to search for news of lawsuits, or to contact the original mfr. and ask if their product has been licensed or rebranded, every time we make a purchase? I think that's asking too much.

In the case of the Strida, we who have read this thread have a bitter pill to swallow. Now that we have reasonable evidence the the Strida copies are illegal, we are (should be) ethically compelled not to buy it. But we must do so with the knowledge that others who buy the copy without the knowledge of it being illegal can do so with a clear conscience.

Design patents generally last fourteen years from the date the patent was granted. Legally that's how long others should wait before manufacturing copies.

I believe that intellectual property is worthy of protection. And in this case, when I've seen a letter written by the inventor stating that the IP was ripped off, I feel ethically compelled not to buy the copy.

That said, the ethical issue gets really complicated. How much responsibility must the consumer bear to make sure that everything he/she buys is genuine or legal and not an illegal copy? Designs and technologies are licensed every day, so it's not valid to say one should assume all copies are illegal. It's also not the consumer's job to enforce patent law. If one sees an item for sale at a much lower price than its competitor, and it is being sold through conventional channels (i.e. not off the back of a truck) how is one to know that it is an illegal copy? Are we ethically required to search for news of lawsuits, or to contact the original mfr. and ask if their product has been licensed or rebranded, every time we make a purchase? I think that's asking too much.

In the case of the Strida, we who have read this thread have a bitter pill to swallow. Now that we have reasonable evidence the the Strida copies are illegal, we are (should be) ethically compelled not to buy it. But we must do so with the knowledge that others who buy the copy without the knowledge of it being illegal can do so with a clear conscience.

The Strida was patented in '86, so this may be much ado about nothing.

Ming Cycle has also marketed the Strida at the same price as it was when manufactured in GB, despite the lower operating cost in Taiwan, making it much more likely that it would be copied. If they had dropped the price to reflect their costs, maybe there would have been less incentive.

Unless you purchase hand made products exclusively from high end botiques, I guarantee you that you buy knockoffs on a regular basis, especially if you shop at Wallmart, big box retailers, online, and ebay. http://www.popsci.com/iclone .

The manufacturers have to share a large portion of the blame for the current situation. In their greed for the bottom line they have rushed to offsore as much as possible and made it possible for the third world to manufacture just about everything. What did they think was going to happen?

They even created their own knockoff lines with the advent of the outlet stores.

Me thinks they protest too much.

I believe that intellectual property is worthy of protection. And in this case, when I've seen a letter written by the inventor stating that the IP was ripped off, I feel ethically compelled not to buy the copy.

...

In the case of the Strida, we who have read this thread have a bitter pill to swallow. Now that we have reasonable evidence the the Strida copies are illegal, we are (should be) ethically compelled not to buy it. But we must do so with the knowledge that others who buy the copy without the knowledge of it being illegal can do so with a clear conscience.

"...these Fakes are illegal because people (and governments) realise that fakers are tricking users--with dangerous, untested products which use poor materials etc. If something goes wrong the faker takes no responsibility. Apart from this, designers' and inventor's original work, and IP is respected." --letter from Mark Sanders, here: http://www.stridaforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=413

He's saying they could be illegal if they are shoddy enough to be dangerous, but specifically states that the "designers' and inventors' original work (his own), and the IP (Ming's) is respected." Doesn't get much clearer than that. Strida design is out of patent protection and may be legally copied. Forum members are reporting here that quality is satisfactory.

So what's the problem with these now?

"Originally Posted by jdownie China does not care about IP so it would be impossible to go after the manufacturer.

Actually, according to some articles in the Economist, this is changing. Apparently, being an intellectual property lawyer in China is now quite lucrative.

EDIT: Just to make it clear, I have not been to China and don't have any special knowledge regarding what is actually happening there."

I have been to China and do regular business there. For a CD/DVD duplication project we have going on right now, we had to sign forms saying that we claim control of copyright and rights for reproduction, also there is governmental review of all material being duplicated (granted, this is political control rather than IP protection). Without the legal docs and gov't review, we could not legally reproduce material in China. This is more than it takes to reproduce something at this level here in the states--no docs to sign off on asserting copyright ownership and duplication rights, no gov't review.

That being said, the Rolexes being sold at markets for $20 were probably not real... There's still plenty of problems over there regarding IP issues.

Frankly, I'm pretty disgusted when I hear what is more and more coming across as acceptable bigotry in regards to China. I guess it shouldn't surprise me--Taiwan and Japan went through the same things before they were embraced at the retail/consumer "most favored nation status" level. Won't be too long before people start clamoring for Chinese made bikes and dumping on India for alleged IP infringment.

If you want better or longer IP protection on patent material, lobby your congresscritter--Disney has done an amazing job protecting Mickey and even a casual observer will note copyright has been extended by Congress pretty much every time the release of Mickey into the public domain has threatened. IP is a just another political football, not some objective standard.

But these "Strida knockoffs" are legit. The other company using Strida's/Ming's copyright material for their marketing is a different beast altogether--that is blatantly illegal copyright infringment by international standards. Maybe not Chinese... So if you get in a kerfluffle about copyright protection for marketing copy and photography, there's the crux of what you might possibly have against something like this, but as far as IP regarding the bike design, they are completely in the clear.

mconlonx

you are my hero.

haha,..
well you hit all the points, bang-on. When I was in china < 6 months ago, i saw so many new and cool bikes/electro-bikes (friggin everywhere) that it would not surprise me in the least to see some big name completely copy something that will be another few years to make it into north america. I don't see anyone sticking it into these companies for mass producing an idea that evolved from a country where the greater population in asia ride bikes DAILY cuz they don't have a choice!

anyways, where is the original poster of this thread, did he ever get one of these bikes? im so tempted to get one of these.. lol

http://www.bikersden.com/public/ProductImages/1000/Thumbnail.jpg

anyone rip about with one of these lids on their folders?

Anyone who buys them is supporting intellectual property theft and cheating. I'm surprised you would even contemplate buying one. If you think the Strida 5 is overpriced then don't buy one at all. They hardly had the originality that Mark Sanders has to come up with such a concept. I'm sure the parts are inferior too in this case since they are prepared to rip off somebody elses concept.

I thought China had joined the WTO now and would crack down on companies like these. Some hope!

This has been covered before with Brompton, etc...

No intellectual property is being stolen. The patents on the Strida are long expired. That's what happens when a patent gets old. Do you still want to only have Kleenex providing facial tissue, or should we sue all those companies, too? Patents do expire, and it's all public information. Check it out.

Just to be clear and avoid the oncoming rebuttle, patents can be extended, but there are limitations. I would think the original inventor liquidating all his stake probably doesn't allow that as a possiblility.

Design patents generally last fourteen years from the date the patent was granted. Legally that's how long others should wait before manufacturing copies.

I believe that intellectual property is worthy of protection. And in this case, when I've seen a letter written by the inventor stating that the IP was ripped off, I feel ethically compelled not to buy the copy.

That said, the ethical issue gets really complicated. How much responsibility must the consumer bear to make sure that everything he/she buys is genuine or legal and not an illegal copy? Designs and technologies are licensed every day, so it's not valid to say one should assume all copies are illegal. It's also not the consumer's job to enforce patent law. If one sees an item for sale at a much lower price than its competitor, and it is being sold through conventional channels (i.e. not off the back of a truck) how is one to know that it is an illegal copy? Are we ethically required to search for news of lawsuits, or to contact the original mfr. and ask if their product has been licensed or rebranded, every time we make a purchase? I think that's asking too much.

In the case of the Strida, we who have read this thread have a bitter pill to swallow. Now that we have reasonable evidence the the Strida copies are illegal, we are (should be) ethically compelled not to buy it. But we must do so with the knowledge that others who buy the copy without the knowledge of it being illegal can do so with a clear conscience.

On the contrary, as a firm believer in the sanctity of copyright I must argue that the copyright laws must be exercised to remain healthy and beneficial to society. In order for copyright law to work there must be a balance between the interests of inventors and the interests of the public. If the public does not push then there will be no balance and everyone will lose. Therefore, it is every consumer's moral responsibility to buy and encourage knockoffs. Let the copyright holders fight for their rights, if they really think it is worth it.

Anything less is downright uncapitalist. You aren't some kind of pinky pink communist are you? :)

Makeinu - you are a fan of 'carry-me' by pacific .... would you buy a fake carry -me ?