Friday, April 25, 2008
Sunday, April 6, 2008
GM charges Chery for alleged mini car piracy
By Gong Zhengzheng (China Daily)
Updated: 2004-12-18 00:37
Contributed by Julian Po
US auto giant General Motors (GM) filed a lawsuit against China's Chery Automobile Co for alleged piracy of a mini car developed by its South Korean affiliate Daewoo.
Chevy Spark
Chery QQ
The lawsuit, launched in the name of GM Daewoo Auto & Technology Co Ltd, contends Chery's QQ copied the design of Daewoo's Matiz while Chery claims it developed the QQ on its own.
GM's investigation results showed the two vehicles "shared remarkably identical body structure, exterior design, interior design and key components," GM China Group said in a statement on Thursday night.
GM's joint venture with Shanghai Automotive Industry Corp (SAIC) and Wuling Motor Corp in the southern Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region began producing the Matiz under licence from Daewoo as the Chevrolet Spark at the end of last year.
Chery, a State-owned car producer formed in eastern Anhui Province, began making the QQ in 2002.
"The Chinese Government advised GM to resolve the issue through mediation or legal means," Ken Wong, general counsel of GM Daewoo, said in the statement.
"Despite our good faith efforts and the assistance of the Chinese Government in the past year, Chery has been non-responsive to mediation efforts, and has even stepped up efforts to export the vehicle to other markets," Wong said.
Chery's alleged infringement has also been impacting the 4,300 employees of the GM joint venture and nearly 100 dealers for their Spark model in China, said Tim Stratford, general counsel of GM China Group.
GM China Group said some 8,000 Sparks have been sold in China.
Sales of the QQ are much higher than that of the Spark because of its earlier launch and lower prices, but the Chery official declined to reveal specific figures.
However, an official from Chery defended the company's practice on Friday, saying: "We conduct product designs according to international rules."
"Chery is one of the key State-backed automakers with depends on itself for self development," the official told China Daily.
The GM lawsuit came after officials from the State Intellectual Property Office announced in September that Chery's alleged infringement does not exist according to evidence provided by GM, despite the QQ's similar appearance with the Spark.
Japan's Honda Motor sued Shuanghuan Automobile in northern Hebei Province for infringement starting in October.
Honda accused Shuanghuan's Laibao SRV of copying its CR-V sport utility vehicle, requiring a compensation of 100 million yuan (US$12.1 million).
The Japanese automaker began making the CR-V in April at its joint venture with Dongfeng Motor Corp in central Hubei Province.
Toyota Motor Corp filed a trademark infringement lawsuit against Geely, the privately-owned compact car maker in eastern Zhejiang Province last year, but lost the case.
Analysts say more intellectual property disputes between domestic and foreign automakers will emerge as a result of Chinese firms' lack of strong development capabilities and the more profitable car market in China than in developed nations.
"Chinese automakers must enhance their independent development capabilities, instead of copying others. Otherwise, we will lag further behind foreign rivals," Jia Xinguang with the China Automotive Industry Consulting and Development Corp, said in an interview with China Daily.
Around 90 per cent of China's passenger car market is controlled by foreign brands.
Sales of China-made vehicles are forecast to exceed 5 million units this year, up from 4.4 million units last year.
Julian's comments:
I feel like commenting on this but I can't because I already commented on 3 of my articles and 3 of others'! But anyway, this post is dedicated to all those who wonder how similar those 2 cars are like.
Then again, it's strange for GM (Chevy or Chevrolet) to not sue Chery for trademark! I mean... Chevy... Chery... don't they sound the same?
Labels: articles, Piracy, Posts by Julian the great
0 comments | comment?
Mattel and China Differ on Apology
Interpretation Sets Off Debate
By Renae Merle and Ylan Q. Mui
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, September 22, 2007; D01
Contributed by Julian Po
After weeks of uproar and suspicion about the safety of Chinese-made products, an executive of the
Mattel toy company met with
China's top product safety official yesterday to issue an apology. Just what the apology meant, however, was caught up in translation.
Mattel says that Thomas A. Debrowski, its executive vice president for worldwide operations, was in
Beijing to repeat what the company had already said in
Europe and the United States, that it was sorry for the recall of millions of toys, and that it was doing all it could to prevent further problems.
The Chinese press heard it differently. The state-run
New China News Agency said Debrowski "apologized personally Friday to a senior Chinese official for the massive recall of Made-in-China toys due to design flaws committed by itself." Other media outlets said Debrowski apologized for harming the reputation of Chinese firms.
To an American ear, the news agency reports sounded as if Debrowski was making an apology for any blame placed on China.
In the United States, however, Mattel said in a statement that some reports of the meeting had been "mischaracterized."
When Debrowski said, "Mattel takes full responsibility for these recalls and apologizes personally to you, the Chinese people, and all of our customers who received the toys," the company said he was telling Chinese product safety chief Li Changjiang what had been said elsewhere, including that a majority of the problems had been associated with design issues, not Chinese manufacturers.
The majority of Mattel's recalls, 17.4 million units, were associated with the firm's long-standing problem of strong magnets falling out of toys and endangering children who could swallow them, Mattel said in a statement. The rest, 2.2 million, Mattel blamed on Chinese firms that used lead-based paint, which is prohibited in the United States.
Mattel, of course, has every interest in maintaining a good relationship with China, even as it must shore up the confidence of its customers. The
El Segundo,
Calif., toymaker receives 65 percent of its toys from China and has made significant financial investments in the Asian country. Mattel's stock closed yesterday at $23.94 per share, up 38 cents.
The recall of nearly 20 million Chinese-made toys, including some Big Bird and Elmo products, and Barbie accessories came at a sensitive time. Chinese products had already had plenty of negative publicity, starting with the recall of tainted dog food, followed by recalls of toothpaste and then seafood with a banned antibiotic. The
U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission yesterday added Chinese-made cribs to the list, announcing the recall of 1 million of the products that pose a suffocation hazard. The crib problems were not linked to Chinese manufacturing but to design flaws. Still, the words "Made in China" were reported.
The recalls have led to a series of congressional hearings where China, along with U.S. regulators, were cast in a negative light.
Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.) has proposed suspending imports of food and toys from China. "There has been a cascade and that's caused a U.S. consumer perception crisis of China, not all of it justified," said Drew Thompson, director of China studies at the Nixon Center.
"China has received a lot of blame for the recalls in the West," said Hari Bapuji, assistant professor at the University of Manitoba in
Canada and lead author of the report, "Toy Recalls -- Is China the Problem?" "They do have problems, there is no doubt. But I think the blame they received was larger than their share of their responsibility for the problem."
In an earlier statement in China, Mattel had said that its recalls for lead-based paint had been "overly inclusive" and included toys that met U.S. standards. A Mattel spokesman could not say how many of the toys did not need to be recalled.
Mattel is "dependent on Chinese industrial capacity for its toys," said
Eric Johnson, a management professor at the Tuck School of Business at
Dartmouth, who has studied the toy industry's migration to China. "They have significant investment of their own capital" in the country "and don't want to lose it. I suspect that Mattel has a vested interest in expanding into the Chinese market as well."
The news agency report was the latest in a series of statements from the Chinese government that suggest a new public relations strategy is underway that plays up evidence China was being treated unfairly. On Sept. 7, for example, after a meeting between Indonesian and Chinese officials over Chinese candy that allegedly contained excessive levels of formaldehyde, China said, "Indonesian authorities yesterday acknowledged that formaldehyde exists naturally in food" and regretted its earlier criticism. In turn, China promised to re-evaluate its decision to ban Indonesian seafood.
The prospect of a potential Mattel apology to China was criticized by some in Congress. "While I'm not going to argue with a U.S. company's apology for recent toy recalls, most would agree that China should be apologizing as well to consumers around the world for exporting shoddy products and dangerous food,"
Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), who has been critical of China's regulatory and export systems.
By emphasizing a public apology by Mattel, China gains a public relations advantage, experts said. "This is all about saving face and a private apology wouldn't have done that for China. They really needed this public apology," Johnson said.
Correspondent Ariana Eunjung Cha in Shanghai contributed to this report.
Julian's comments:Eeew, and as a child, I kept mistaking lead-coated Thomas and Friends train tracks for chocolate bars...
...
...not Thomas Foo,
lah!
Nevertheless, this is a typical case of overassumption, oversight and premature conclusion that China is to blame for everything. From the article, there could be a possibility that China has been used as a scapegoat for every MNC blunders; the fact that so many of these substandard products exist in China, has been exploited by these despicable corporations as an excuse for their own faults.
So, let this clear the smokescreen: when you see your child accidentally swallow a made-in-China Barbie's head, it might not have anything to do with China but the child un-friendly design of the doll. And who designed it? *pretends to not look at the holier-than-thou Westerners*
Oh, and here's my word of advice to Mr. Thomas (again, not Thomas Foo,
lah!) Debrowski: fire your media correspondent!
Labels: articles, Posts by Julian the great, product safety
0 comments | comment?
Taiwan vice president-elect may meet China's Hu
Sun Apr 6, 2008 6:25am EDT
Contributed by Julian Po
TAIPEI (Reuters) - Taiwan's vice president-elect may meet Chinese leader Hu Jintao at a trade fair in China this week, local media said on Sunday, an unprecedented step that would underline the chances for a thaw after years of diplomatic chill.
The trip comes soon after a landslide victory by President-elect Ma Ying-jeou and running mate Vincent Siew in elections last month on a platform to repair strained ties with China, which considers the self-ruled island its own.
Siew, who heads the Cross-Strait Common Market Foundation, will be leading a Taiwan delegation to the annual Boao Forum For Asia in China's southern island province of Hainan.
"Mr. Siew should be able to go. China hasn't said no and that's why we've decided to announce to everybody that we'll be going to the forum on April 11 and returning on April 13," Yu-chi Wang, spokesman for the delegation told Reuters by telephone.
Wang said it was not confirmed whether there would be a meeting between Siew and Hu, though local media, including Taiwan's TVBS television station and the United Daily News, said the two might meet since Hu would be attending the event this year.
The Taiwan Affairs Office was unavailable for comment.
Official talks between China and Taiwan have been suspended since 1999, when Taiwan's former president, Lee Teng-hui, redefined ties as "special state-to-state" relations.
But with the election of the more China-friendly Ma, some analysts believe more than half a century of hostility and tension between China and Taiwan might finally come to an end.
Siew, an ex-premier who has also held top economics posts in Taiwan, has been attending the annual forum in China over the past few years.
China sees Taiwan as a wayward province and wants to bring the island under its fold, by force if necessary. Despite political differences, trade ties have flourished and China has since become Taiwan's top trading partner and favourite investment destination.
(Reporting by Meg Shen and Ian Ransom in Beijing, writing by Lee Chyen Yee; Editing by Sanjeev Miglani)
Julian's comments:Ah yes, aren't we tired of Ah Bian's antagonistic, obonoxious attempts to internationalise Taiwan by renaming national monuments?
Finally, we have two political figures in Taiwan who understand the benefits of a united China, albeit One China, Two Systems. I mean, for the interest of everyone, Taiwan + Hong Kong + Macau + reunification with Mainland = 三媳妇回娘家 = one big, happy family, right?
Mind the digression, but China should be commended for wisely refraining from interfering with 2008's Taiwanese elections. Considering the amount of negative news pin-pointed towards China recently, having "China and Taiwan: 4th Straits Crisis" on the headlines would officially snub the former's dream of hosting a great Olympics.
On the Taiwanese side, the growing evidence of their loss of competitiveness to China would, all the more, necessitate greater economic cooperation between both parties. And with Hong Kong now on China's side (Imagine David + Goliath versus, erm, Mini David) and Japan starting to recover from recession, Taiwan is beginning to feel the pressure of compromising national interests for economic ones. Like Steve Martin would put it, "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em!"
Besides, with all the failed pleas to secure a seat in the UN, and with so few countries on official diplomatic ties with Taiwan, being nice to the Big Bro. aka China would seem like the only way to truly internationalise Taiwan and give her the status that she desperately craves for. So, are you listening, Ah Bian?
UPDATE! New article on China-Taiwan relations!
China to honour its commitment to send pandas to Taiwan
From The Hindu News Update Service
Beijing (PTI) China on Friday said it stood by its commitment to send two giant pandas to Taiwan, a move seen by many as Beijings 'panda diplomacy' to soften its ties with the self-ruled island.
Chinas offer to send the pandas was earlier rejected by Taiwan's outgoing administration of Chen Shui-bian, apparently under pressure from pro-independence forces who saw Beijings move as a "propaganda ploy".
However, in a major boost to China's attempts at establishing closer relations with Taiwan, Ma Ying-jeou, who is in favour of closer ties with Beijing scored a landslide victory in the recent presidential elections.
The newly elected Taiwanese leader recently gave his approval to receive the two pandas from China.
He said as Taipei mayor earlier, he had supported acceptance of the giant pandas from China and "so I am in favour of receiving the pandas".
The panda pair, named Tuan Tuan and Yuan Yuan characters that go together meaning unite were healthy and happy at the Wolong Giant Panda Research Centre in southwestern Sichuan province of China, the State Forestry Administration spokesman Cao Qingyao said, according to Xinhua news agency.
"To let our Taiwan compatriots meet these two pandas at an early date, we hope that relevant organizations on both sides of the Taiwan Strait will start communication and negotiations as soon as possible," Qingyao said.
Taipei and Taichung cities and Hsinchu county are vying with each other to host the pandas from the mainland, after the victory of Ma Ying-jeou, Taiwan media said.
Taiwan had split from China during the civil war in 1949 but Beijing claims it to be part of its territory.
Labels: articles, Panda, Posts by Julian the great, Taiwan
1 comments | comment?
Read the Writing on the Great Wall
Commentary: Read the Writing on the Great Wall
Jay Weiner for Business Week
Contributed by Julian Po
The world is watching China, and what it sees isn't pretty. But Beijing still has time to get the messageSeven years ago, when the International Olympic Committee awarded the 2008 Games to China, the Olympics were supposed to bestow on Beijing a sheen of progress.
Operating under the quintet of intertwined circles and the high-minded values that are trademarks of the Olympic Movement, it was thought, would compel Beijing's rulers to be more open, more democratic.
But now the five rings are starting to choke China. Instead of a sporting event that nudges the Chinese regime toward more fairness and transparency, the Games are serving only to highlight events such as the crackdown in Tibet.
Meantime, Human Rights Watch is spotlighting the squalid conditions of the migrant workers building Olympic venues, and on Mar. 31, Dream for Darfur is scheduled to release a "report card" on the response of Olympic corporate sponsors to China's support of "genocide" in Sudan.
To make matters worse, the IOC just announced that Beijing's miserable air quality might mean rescheduling endurance events. But no, there won't be an official boycott. The EU says it won't back one. And President Bush's Treasury owes too much money to China for the U.S. to rain on the most important parade since The Long March. Besides, a series of boycotts from 1976-84 almost destroyed the Olympics and punished no one but hard-working athletes.
"Boycotts don't work," says Jill Savitt, executive director of Dream for Darfur, a group pressuring China over its support of the Sudanese regime. "Boycotts are tired. They're old school. They're kind of fringy and lefty."
The political stage belongs to those who show up, not to those who stay away. Ask the angry Tibetan monks. So with a little more than four months to go until Opening Ceremonies, China's coming-out party has become a steady drip of organized protest. China's leaders can whine that there is no connection between politics and sports, but only the naive take them seriously.
The Olympics are a political event and have been forever thus. The Internet and YouTube—when they're not blocked by censors—will turn the runup to these Games into viral political theater. In the be-careful-what-you-wish-for department, the whole world will be watching China—and not just what Beijing wants it to watch.
ENDURING OPTIMISM
The touching contradiction is that, deep down, the people seem to want the Olympics to serve as a channel for what they call "public diplomacy"—the projection of the values and opinions of China to the rest of us, not the formal, measured diplomacy of dark suits in ornate rooms.
They're hoping for a transfer of good vibes. "Beijing's citizens want to be perfect hosts," says Zhong Xin, an associate professor of journalism and communication at Beijing's Renmin University and a visiting research fellow at the University of Maryland.
One fascinating finding from a survey of Beijing residents revealed that an overwhelming number saw the Olympics as an opportunity for "Chinese officials [to] show their capability in dealing with tough issues," Zhong says. So maybe it's helpful that all this dissent has come now.
China's decision-makers have time to digest the world's reactions and adjust their behavior accordingly. But if the leadership can't—or won't—read the clear signals, if they stonewall, if they censor, if they bludgeon, the Olympic Games will become a mere sideshow. And those five rings, once filled with so much promise, will become rings of fire.
Jay Weiner, based in St. Paul, Minn., has covered every Olympics since 1984 and will be in Beijing.
Julian's comments:Like myself (an OCD sufferer,) China is realising that nothing can be perfect, not even an Olympic games. As China plays host to one of the largest world events, it is bound to be scrutinised by especially the foreign media.
Since it is impossible (and childish) for "a globalised world" to boycott the Olympics, as in the case of the 1980 Moscow and 1984 Los Angeles Games, China-bashers have decided to use the influential and outspoken traits of the media to publicise their atrocities, hoping to make the Beijing 2008 Games unforgettable... for the wrong reasons. Ah, those scheming jerks. *pretends to not look at the holier-than-thou Westerners*
However, considering the improvement in infrastructure and their ability to contain the Tibet unrests (for now,) China should be commended for doing a good job in preparation for their big celebration on 08/08/08.
What's more, if you were to look at the controversies of other Olympic hosts -- Salt Lake City's bribes on IOC members, Athens eleventh hour completion of olympic venues and London's "Har?! A hideous looking stadium for 470 million pounds!" -- all I could say is, thank goodness for bad air quality in Beijing. *smirks*
Labels: articles, Beijing Olympics, Darfur conflict, Posts by Julian the great, Too bad but I just mentioned Tibet in this article :P
0 comments | comment?
