Fox Farm

I do not have a dog in this race, so to speak, but I will speak up for November Dave as being a great individual to deal with. About 4 years ago, I was potentially in the market for a new frame when my Orbea was experiencing carbon failure. I was shopping for some other candidates in the event that Orbea did not or would not replace my frame set. I was corresponding with Dave at November and really was impressed by his help and responsiveness to my inquiry. Fortunately for me, Orbea honored everything and replaced my Orca, sending me a new one with no questions asked. Otherwise, I likely would have gone with November as I liked their products, the cool name and graphics, and character of the company. I would also say the same for Boyd Johnson at Boyd Cycling; quality individuals' who stand behind their products and who are small players in a big pond of frame makers and wheelset manufacturers.

garciawork

OK, am I reading this correctly? Is it being asserted that any steel bike made with Italian steel (as is the case with my custom) should be classified as "Made in Italy", or the FTC would have a problem? Because mine was definitely welded by a builder in the US, but I should let him know he should be saying "made in Italy"!

Correct me if I am wrong.

joejack951

Wrong, very wrong.

Made in USA with Italian steel tubing.

RJM

Which should be shortened to "made in the USA" as every builder does.

Your interpretation of "the rules" is incorrect.

joejack951

Are they rules or "rules"? Are you going to try and argue your case or just say 'you're wrong'? No point in discussing if your mind is made up already. I've openly stated that I'll change my opinion if presented with a strong case. Until then, I won't accept that the carbon fiber or steel used in a carbon fiber or steel bike frame is 'negligible'.

noodle soup

No one cares enough about what you think, to try to change your mind. Believe whatever makes you happy.

cale

What is something made? Isn't it common sense to suggest that a "made" product has a planning, infrastructure, and manufacturing component?

I've read every post. I've read a guy who thinks he can interpret trade law from a website. I've read the clear headed response from a manufacturer who wants good will for cyclists regardless of the size of their pocketbook. There is also an abundance of reasoned arguments in support of November.

I'll say this. If you've got the kahonnas to "fare" the highly toxic and temperamental seas of today's bike manufacturing industry with a bike you designed, fabricated in most all conceivable ways, and will bear the brunt and expensive of marketing (trade shows, literature, copy and publicity, the list goes on), then you deserve to say that product was made where it is made.

To suggest otherwise is to simply sow discontent at the expense of hard working people.

UnfilteredDregs

Disagree? this has nothing to do with disagree.

You've come into this thread and consistently made passive-aggressive negative inferences about the vendor in question and you still are continuing to irrationally rail about what is settled and agreed upon via various trade agreements and law. What you think, believe, and how you interpret doesn't matter because those who do matter have already decided the matter, and myriad cases exist establishing the precedent you question.

You really ought to shut up and let the thread get back on track especially considering no one is buying your ridiculous attempt to disparage this vendor.

You brought all the paint and brushes you need to this party yourself.

RJM

Well, one part of my argument would be the amount of bike builders stating "made in the USA" using foreign sourced carbon...as well as all the custom steel builders using foreign sourced steel like Columbus tubing. They must be all breaking the law.

or you are just wrong.

garciawork

That was where my question originated. I find it difficult to believe that an at times litigious company like Specialized (or anyone with deep pockets in the industry) would allow any competitor to illegally state that a bike was "Made in the US" if there was any argument against it.

joejack951

You can read into what I've said all you want. Won't make it true. I've sincerely complimented the vendor several times and haven't made any attempt to push someone away from their products. My only 'beef' is the unqualified 'Made in Italy' statement. I've tried to discuss it but everyone seems bent on assuming that I'm trying to say the frames are Made in Japan.

Quoting the FTC is irrational?

I've been asking for someone to cite a case for a while now. Can you link me to an example? I've found this article which I believe supports what I'm saying: https://www.clarkhill.com/uploads/med..._S_A___LF_.pdf

As soon as 'shut up' is mentioned in a discussion, I'll end my involvement unless there's some sincere attempt to continue it.

joejack951

Or they are breaking the law but since 'everyone else is doing it' no one has filed a complaint with the FTC.

garciawork

Specialized sued a shop for the word "Roubaix", Epic Designs over the word "Epic", Epic Wheel Works for "Epic" again, "Epix Gear" for... well easy enough to guess, and Mountain Cycle over the use of "Stumptown" on a CX bike. Those all cost them money, so why wouldn't they file inexpensive claims with the FTC over all of these "incorrectly" labeled "Made in USA" bikes? Surely the bikes in question would lose considerable luster if they were not labeled as such, and given the flak all the big companies got for outsourcing, wouldn't they want "Made in USA" to be nearly impossible for anyone else to attain?

joejack951

My only guess is that Specialized does not consider any of those companies competitors and as such ignores them. They have nothing to lose there as I doubt they ever intend on making a 'Made in USA' bike frame.

The way trademark and patent laws work, however, is that if you ignore any infringement in that area you pretty much lose your rights to those items. Specialized spent good money on those trademarks originally and continues to do so (maintenance fees). They have to sue for things like that. And suing small companies is a great way to set a precedent as well so that no larger company attempts to do anything of the sort.

garciawork

I am aware of the differences in trademarks, however I don't believe they would ignore ANYTHING that could hurt a competitor. They certainly haven't in the past, even when their actions have hurt them more than helped. I could be wrong of course, but a lack of complaints to the FTC leads me to believe that these companies are doing nothing wrong.

Sy Reene

Where is the carbon mined (is carbon mined?) that goes into the fiber that's created in Japan? Where are the machines made that are used to mine this carbon, and what country of origin makes the hard hats that the miners wear?

PepeM

We've had this discussion before. Where the raw material comes from does not matter. If the item goes through 'substantial transformation' in X country, then the item is considered to be made in X country. If you take metal from Y and turn it into a bicycle frame in X, then the frame is made in X. I won't go around posting links this time, if anyone is that interested in how these things are decided feel free to look for the information yourself.

joejack951

Like I said, I don't think Specialized sees those companies as direct competitors. With the trademark stuff, they risk losing their rights to exclusively use those marks if they don't respond to infringement, hence going after non-competitors. By setting precedents suing small companies, they get a lot of future protection so for the little bit of tarnish their rep gets, it goes a long way to helping them in the future.

joejack951

If you take some bolts and a net from China to complete your basketball hoop, it's still made in USA (unqualified), right? Or not: Chinese Nets and Bolts Ensnare Basketball Hoops in Litigation - WSJ

RJM

If the nylon to make the rope was made in Japan but then shipped here to form into a net, then used in the basketball hoop...then what would you have? Likewise with the metal used to make the bolts....the metal comes from Japan but the bolts were machined here...then what would you have? That is more of the proper analogy to making a bicycle here out of carbon sheets made elsewhere. More steps removed....

And it still has **** all to do with November's bike being made in Italy.

PepeM

Well, California thinks it isn't, the rest of the world think it is.

joejack951

It's not just steps removed but also the significance in the final product that matters (and cost). I haven't found the perfect analogy for a bike frame in a case. I do think it could go either way (though I obviously think one side stands a better chance) but that would have as much to do with the lawyers involved as it does with the wording of the law.

A question for everyone: what's so bad about Made in Italy with Japanese carbon fiber anyway? Or Made in USA with Italian/Japanese steel? Made in Japan = good. Made in Italy = clearly good (judging by this thread). But partially made in either is so horrific?

PepeM

Nothing 'bad' about it.

Maybe we should all demand a detailed list of the source of every component of every item we purchase detailing where it comes from, starting at the extraction point and ending where it was attached to the final product.

RJM

Probably not....I'm going with you are just wrong.

noodle soup

+1

That isn't uncommon when people without law degrees start interpreting laws.