Chinese knockoffs

[grouper therapy]

DawgFace;773087 wrote: Grouper, again you don't get it, by that I mean my position. I understand your point of view but will not agree or disagree nor will I acknowledge my involvement if any in your point of contention as this was not what the discussion was about. I find the notion outrageous that I can not give my opinion about a topic without first expunging my self from guilt on all matters related according to public (your) approval. To me this is the equivalent to disregarding my opposition to murder by assuming that I break the law by speeding occasionally. Add to the fact that your entire argument is an assumption without basis, unless you know something about me, my builder and/or hired help that I don't. In addition it appears your perceived guilt of one has a absolute required acceptance of another. e.g. if at one point I've hired illegal help I should dispose of my opinions and denigrate my integrity forever more by congratulating this type of activity.

While I would be happy to discuss the repercussions and my position on illegal migrate workers, I will not justify my position here with a response.

So I say again, I find the acceptance, approval and celebration of knock off anything troubling.

If that in and by itself is condescending by way of postulating my views or actions on another off topic conversation then so be it.

Respectfully,
DawgFace

You can give your opinion as you did. Why not I did ! I assumed nothing that is why I added if you bought a house that was built by that illegal work force,then you contributed to an illegal act . I also stated that in my original post that both the ya and nays were involved IMO. Now if you perceive one as a murder and the other as an occasional speeding ticket then that is what I don't understand unless it offers you some justification perhaps. You owe me nothing and by all means you don't have to explain to me your position I understand where you stand, I don't agree . I am more than willing to hear how you think the two differ in regards principle. I have not expressed how I feel about either one of the scenarios. I just stated facts of what happened to me because of one those illegal actions and the support it received by the general population here in Atlanta . I'm not upset you expressed your point I just find it hypocritical if you supported the illegal action here. I did offer numerous facts as to why I feel that way. No hard feelings here. I like to discuss different views especially if the basis for those views are shared. I think it helps us grow. Some don't like it I guess and take it personal.

Edit:

126 reef;773105 wrote: I could not agree more. To question everyones credibility that disagrees with Chinese knockoffs and label them as hypocrites based on a baseless assumption there could have been an illegal that built your house 20 years ago is absolutely ridiculous. I'm glad Dawgface put it so well so I did not have to do all that typing.

That is what you got out of the discussion? The funny thing is no one has stated why they think it is ridiculous. Not one person has stated why the two are not the same in principle, Not one. No one disputed the facts that both share , not one. So please enlighten me of how the two are different. BTW both are based on assumption so you may want to let that rest. Perhaps some feel better about themselves if they just disregard the other. Everyone wants to say they are not the same but no one says why. Maybe they don't know?

 

[cjsparky]

grouper therapy;773134 wrote: Not one person has stated why the two are not the same in principle, Not one. No one disputed the facts that both share , not one. So please enlighten me of how the two are different. BTW both are based on assumption so you may want to let that rest. Perhaps some feel better about themselves if they just disregard the other.

Buying a home that may (probably) was built with undocumented labor is happenstance...Waiting with baited breath for a chinese knock-off is not happenstance.

Hiring a GC to build you a home, and the GC hires subcontractors, and those subcontractors employ undocumented labor, is happenstance. Hiring a GC and requesting that they save you money by seeking out not the cheapest labor, but specifically undocumented labor to build your home is not.

Going to McDonalds and buying a burger who employed a person behind the counter who possessed a stolen SSN and is actually an undocumented laborer is happenstance....

Having a landscaper come to your home, and provide to you a detailed plan for landscaping your home as part of a small-fee service to earn your business is fine...Grabbing a bunch of out of work laborers in front of Home Depot, Giving them the hours of operation of the nursery that gave you the quote, having them steal all of the corresponding trees, shrubs, et. while buying sand, top soil, and manure from another shop, to come and install the lot of it at a huge discount, cash under the table is not happenstance.

My problem with the argument here is not based in principle...for me it is all about intent.

CJ

 

[grouper therapy]

Cjsparky;773149 wrote: Buying a home that may (probably) was built with undocumented labor is happenstance...Waiting with baited breath for a chinese knock-off is not happenstance.

Hiring a GC to build you a home, and the GC hires subcontractors, and those subcontractors employ undocumented labor, is happenstance. Hiring a GC and requesting that they save you money by seeking out not the cheapest labor, but specifically undocumented labor to build your home is not.

Going to McDonalds and buying a burger who employed a person behind the counter who possessed a stolen SSN and is actually an undocumented laborer is happenstance....

Having a landscaper come to your home, and provide to you a detailed plan for landscaping your home as part of a small-fee service to earn your business is fine...Grabbing a bunch of out of work laborers in front of Home Depot, Giving them the hours of operation of the nursery that gave you the quote, having them steal all of the corresponding trees, shrubs, et. while buying sand, top soil, and manure from another shop, to come and install the lot of it at a huge discount, cash under the table is not happenstance.

My problem with the argument here is not based in principle...for me it is all about intent.

CJ

I see your point.
SO what is asking the GC if all the workforce on your house is a legal documented labor force? What is that intent?

Edit: Or maybe requesting that they are legal even if it cost more. What would be the intent there?

 

[db366]

Why is it everything has to turn into a heated debate? When I posted that I wasn't talking about buying a illegal product. SunSun (chinese company) makes powerheads that I would call knockoff Korallias, they aren't illegal but they look exactly like Korallias. If they find a way to sell them in the US I plan to buy one. I am not saying I am going to search out a bootleg Vortech..

Breathe guys.. it's okay if not everyone believes the exact same thing as you.

 

[grouper therapy]

db366;773162 wrote: Why is it everything has to turn into a heated debate? When I posted that I wasn't talking about buying a illegal product. SunSun (chinese company) makes powerheads that I would call knockoff Korallias, they aren't illegal but they look exactly like Korallias. If they find a way to sell them in the US I plan to buy one. I am not saying I am going to search out a bootleg Vortech..

Breathe guys.. it's okay if not everyone believes the exact same thing as you.

No it's not
On a serious note. It's not heated on my end at all. I enjoy discussion, debate or arguing ever how you choose to label it. It is how we can learn and adjust our thinking on ideas and issues. Since you are the Op I will honor you request and return to topic. Healthy legal competition is good for business IMO. It forces us to improve. Competition formed from the use of stolen technology , by any illegal means or labor force is not healthy IMO.

 

[grouper therapy]

I don't think the Us made ones are of high quality, I can't imagine me buying any of lessor qaulity

 

[rdnelson]

Skriz;773021 wrote: A hobby, especially this one, is a luxury. Luxury being something that isn't a necessity.

What you are saying is that since you can't afford a luxury item, you feel it is perfectly justifiable to steal it. I know you're paying for it, but you're paying a company who is stealing it. I don't find that acceptable.

Grouper is arguing along the same vein, I believe. Using undocumented labor in the construction industry is another form of stealing and something absolutely should be done about it. When I was shopping for my home, I was shopping based on the features I wanted in the area I wanted and I was willing to pay for it. And, I would've paid more for my house..happily.

In an effort to determine my correct status in society am I correct in interpreting your statement to say that unless I meet a certain income level, this hobby is above my means? Does that also mean that I should not frequent your establishment any longer because I obviously cannot afford you?

I am also curious what platform you are using to access this forum. Is it a Microsoft based platform? If so, are you not also supporting theft of intellectual property? I am pretty comfortable in my belief that most informed people would recognize that Microsoft Windows was pirated from Macintosh. Yet, for a time in history, Microsoft was heralded as the pinnacle in American ingenuity and success. And, if by chance you are using a touch screen cell phone that is not manufactured by Apple does that not also make you a thief?

 

[cjsparky]

grouper therapy;773164 wrote: It's not heated on my end at all. I enjoy discussion, debate or arguing ever how you choose to label it. It is how we can learn and adjust our thinking on ideas and issues. Since you are the Op I will honor you request and return to topic. Healthy legal competition is good for business IMO. It forces us to improve. Competition formed from the use of stolen technology , by any illegal means or labor force is not healthy IMO.

Agreed with all of the above

 

[dawgface]

grouper therapy;773134 wrote: You can give your opinion as you did. Why not I did ! I assumed nothing that is why I added if you bought a house that was built by that illegal work force,then you contributed to an illegal act . I also stated that in my original post that both the ya and nays were involved IMO. Now if you perceive one as a murder and the other as an occasional speeding ticket then that is what I don't understand unless it offers you some justification perhaps. You owe me nothing and by all means you don't have to explain to me your position I understand where you stand, I don't agree . I am more than willing to hear how you think the two differ in regards principle. I have not expressed how I feel about either one of the scenarios. I just stated facts of what happened to me because of one those illegal actions and the support it received by the general population here in Atlanta . I'm not upset you expressed your point I just find it hypocritical if you supported the illegal action here. I did offer numerous facts as to why I feel that way. No hard feelings here. I like to discuss different views especially if the basis for those views are shared. I think it helps us grow. Some don't like it I guess and take it personal.

Where in your initial responses did you ever say "if"?

If that was your intentions then that would change my perception on your post. Truth be told a generalized comment towards the relation of your point and this post would have been met with vivid agreement by myself. However due to the context of the post(s) it came off as disparaging towards opinions of myself and others by the assumption that all are guilty and unworthy of an opinion.

Furthermore you say you do not agree with me?? Again, you are assuming too much! I have not once stated a position on your topic outside of this very post. Go ahead, read through all my posts, it is not there. To say that you disagree with me is to say you agree my only position which is against the stealing of intelluctual property, specifically Knock-offs.

I have done nor said anything that would present anything other than explain and defend my position on the subject at hand. While attempting to ignore the inserted unrelated prerequisite to this position. If nothing more I suppose I could have gave an opinion that would have satisfied you.... But what with all the assumptions and accusations I figured what was the point, you have already convinced yourself I was the opposition.

Plus a good debate is healthy and one that seems less and less as of late.

 

[the-bubonic-one]

rdnelson99;773193 wrote: In an effort to determine my correct status in society am I correct in interpreting your statement to say that unless I meet a certain income level, this hobby is above my means? Does that also mean that I should not frequent your establishment any longer because I obviously cannot afford you?

I am also curious what platform you are using to access this forum. Is it a Microsoft based platform? If so, are you not also supporting theft of intellectual property? I am pretty comfortable in my belief that most informed people would recognize that Microsoft Windows was pirated from Macintosh. Yet, for a time in history, Microsoft was heralded as the pinnacle in American ingenuity and success. And, if by chance you are using a touch screen cell phone that is not manufactured by Apple does that not also make you a thief?

If I remember correctly Steve Jobs "stole" the idea from Xerox who had WIMP. Then used in in his Lisa.

 

[rdnelson]

The-Bubonic-One;773218 wrote: If I remember correctly Steve Jobs "stole" the idea from Xerox who had WIMP. Then used in in his Lisa.

You very well could be correct. I must admit I am not that aware of the situation. However, it illustrates my point further. I would wager to say that each and everyone one of us who has posted in this thread have KNOWINGLY supported something somewhere that was pirated at one point or another. I think the main difference as I see it, would be the willingness of each individual to admit it. The possible exception would be those who are totally ignorant of the situation.

Edit: I would also ask you (with absolutely no mallice) if most of the customers who frequent your stores know where the tomatoes they buy are grown? But, depending on your position within Publix, I suspect you would tell us they are grown in Mexico. While the tomato itself was not pirated, most of the technology used to grown them to the proper standards to allow sale in the US was pirated to Mexico. Does that now mean that all of us MUST stop eating tomatoes? Just curious because I hate tomatoes.

 

[ripped tide]

The age of invention died many years ago. For the past +100 years, we reinvent old ideas.

Can Thomas Edison (inventor of the phonograph[the first instument used to record and play back sound]) hold a grudge against the mass produced mp3 players that we all buy today? Can the first person who discovered magnetite hold a grudge against ecotech for using magnets to build vortechs?

People say that copying a product is tacky, but to "re-create" and modify is genius. Ecotech was not the first manufacture of magnetically powered pumps, but they were the first to market this particular type of pump.

Im certain the a vortech is not the peak of pump technology. Some one else will have a better idea, and when they do, others will copy them.

 

[dawgface]

rdnelson99;773220 wrote: You very well could be correct. I must admit I am not that aware of the situation. However, it illustrates my point further. I would wager to say that each and everyone one of us who has posted in this thread have KNOWINGLY supported something somewhere that was pirated at one point or another. I think the main difference as I see it, would be the willingness of each individual to admit it. The possible exception would be those who are totally ignorant of the situation.

<span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: Verdana">That begs the question, does perceived guilt of one have an absolute required acceptance of another. Should the mild involvement (Microsoft) dictate the acceptance of all future opinions and decision based on the theory of hypocrisy?</span></span>
<span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: Verdana"></span></span>

 

[grouper therapy]

DawgFace;773211 wrote: Where in your initial responses did you ever say "if"?

If that was your intentions then that would change my perception on your post. Truth be told a generalized comment towards the relation of your point and this post would have been met with vivid agreement by myself. However due to the context of the post(s) it came off as disparaging towards opinions of myself and others by the assumption that all are guilty and unworthy of an opinion.

Furthermore you say you do not agree with me?? Again, you are assuming too much! I have not once stated a position on your topic outside of this very post. Go ahead, read through all my posts, it is not there. To say that you disagree with me is to say you agree my only position which is against the stealing of intelluctual property, specifically Knock-offs.

I have done nor said anything that would present anything other than explain and defend my position on the subject at hand. While attempting to ignore the inserted unrelated prerequisite to this position. If nothing more I suppose I could have gave an opinion that would have satisfied you.... But what with all the assumptions and accusations I figured what was the point, you have already convinced yourself I was the opposition.

Plus a good debate is healthy and one that seems less and less as of late.

You are correct sir I said "most" implying not all. My apologies.
You likened the one to murder and the other to occasionally speeding .I took that as you do not view them the same, one being of significance and the other not. I said if that is the case then I do not agree. You continue to separate the two as something different. I understand it is how you view it and that is ok with me. I see that you consider my subject matter irrelevant to the discussion and was curious as to why .I was just trying to understand why and how you came to that conclusion. No foul. I see them as the same. Once again you do not have to explain , it is your prerogative.

Edit:

grouper therapy;772908 wrote: You tell me the difference . Information ,knowledge and Jobs were illegally stolen on both accounts by both foreign workforces. It impacts the US companies negatively, financially speaking on both accounts. Driving down the profitability on both accounts, offering an inferior product at reduced prices. Now one scenario may have legal patent attached but theft is theft by principle.

Edit: I don't expect you to see it from my viewpoint as it did not impact you directly as it did me but it still happened and you contributed to it if you purchased a product of either scenario. Stone cold fact. So you being OK with it is a positive.
I am serious show me the difference from a a viewpoint of principle. I am more than willing to adjust my thinking on the subject if you can do that.

The if came later sorry:doh:

Edit:

DawgFace;773222 wrote: <span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: Verdana">That begs the question, does perceived guilt of one have an absolute required acceptance of another. Should the mild involvement (Microsoft) dictate the acceptance of all future opinions and decision based on the theory of hypocrisy?</span></span>

Only if the one asked to accept it chooses to let it dictate it .

 

[the-bubonic-one]

rdnelson99;773220 wrote: You very well could be correct. I must admit I am not that aware of the situation. However, it illustrates my point further. I would wager to say that each and everyone one of us who has posted in this thread have KNOWINGLY supported something somewhere that was pirated at one point or another. I think the main difference as I see it, would be the willingness of each individual to admit it. The possible exception would be those who are totally ignorant of the situation.

Edit: I would also ask you (with absolutely no mallice) if most of the customers who frequent your stores know where the tomatoes they buy are grown? But, depending on your position within Publix, I suspect you would tell us they are grown in Mexico. While the tomato itself was not pirated, most of the technology used to grown them to the proper standards to allow sale in the US was pirated to Mexico. Does that now mean that all of us MUST stop eating tomatoes? Just curious because I hate tomatoes.

C.O.O.L. Federal law that requires all produce to be labeled with country of origin labeling. :tomato:

 

[rdnelson]

DawgFace;773222 wrote: <span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: Verdana">That begs the question, does perceived guilt of one have an absolute required acceptance of another. Should the mild involvement (Microsoft) dictate the acceptance of all future opinions and decision based on the theory of hypocrisy?</span></span>

Now you are leaning more to my way of thinking if I understand you correctly. We each must judge at what point we believe the line has been crossed. I can tell you that as Ripped Tide said, magnetic induction drive has been around for a very long time. How one company uses it in their design is up to them but they did not invent it. So, if I have Chinese made LED fixtures hanging over my tank am I really a thief? In my opinion no. In the opinion of others who have posted here yes.

Edit:

The-Bubonic-One;773227 wrote: C.O.O.L. Federal law that requires all produce to be labeled with country of origin labeling. :tomato:

So, technically, all people who buy tomatoes that are grown in Mexico do so knowingly. And since the technologies used to grow them to our standards was developed within the United States they are stolen. Therefore anyone who eats a tomato grown in Mexico is a thief? If I am not mistaken, that is what has been stated earlier in this thread.

Edit:

Ripped Tide;773221 wrote: The age of invention died many years ago. For the past +100 years, we reinvent old ideas.

I beg to differ. Did you not see JeF4y's post of his "Maga-Scraper-Vacuum"???? I say the spirit of invention is a live and well. :yay:

 

[dawgface]

rdnelson99;773234 wrote: Now you are leaning more to my way of thinking if I understand you correctly. We each must judge at what point we believe the line has been crossed. I can tell you that as Ripped Tide said, magnetic induction drive has been around for a very long time. How one company uses it in their design is up to them but they did not invent it. So, if I have Chinese made LED fixtures hanging over my tank am I really a thief? In my opinion no. In the opinion of others who have posted here yes.

Edit:

So, technically, all people who buy tomatoes that are grown in Mexico do so knowingly. And since the technologies used to grow them to our standards was developed within the United States they are stolen. Therefore anyone who eats a tomato grown in Mexico is a thief? If I am not mistaken, that is what has been stated earlier in this thread.

Edit:

I beg to differ. Did you not see JeF4y's post of his "Maga-Scraper-Vacuum"???? I say the spirit of invention is a live and well. :yay:

<span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: Verdana"></span></span>
<span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: Verdana">I would argue the whole death of invention theory. Fundamentally it has just transformed into different innovation. e.g. flight, space travel and exploration, advanced medicine, internet.... Technology is our age of innovation and is very much alive and thriving. </span></span>

<span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: Verdana">Unfortunately there is so much more to the complexities of intellectual theft in the generalized economy that demand much more thoughtful discussion than the over simplistic generalization that apply to Knock off's. Microsoft, is one of many that unfortunately can not be used in the applied discussion here IMHO.</span></span>

<span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: Verdana">Nor can tomatoes grown in Mexico lol</span></span>

 

[rdnelson]

DawgFace;773246 wrote:
<span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: Verdana">I would argue the whole death of invention theory. Fundamentally it has just transformed into different innovation. e.g. flight, space travel and exploration, advanced medicine, internet.... Technology is our age of innovation and is very much alive and thriving. </span></span>

<span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: Verdana">Unfortunately there is so much more to the complexities of intellectual theft in the generalized economy that demand much more thoughtful discussion than the over simplistic generalization that apply to Knock off's. Microsoft, is one of many that unfortunately can not be used in the applied discussion here IMHO.</span></span>

<span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: Verdana">Nor can tomatoes grown in Mexico lol</span></span>

Now you have lost me in your justification. Why is it OK for Microsoft to see that Macintosh has a mouse and point and click technology and therefor comes up with their own version but it is not OK for a Chinese company to see that AI or whoever has a LED fixture suitable for marine applications and therefore comes up with one? To the best of my knowledge, LED lighting has been around since the 70s. Cree did not invent that technology. They may have perfected it somewhat but did not invent it. Mater of fact, the Techniques Micro Component amp, pre-amp and tuner I bought in 1979 had a really cool LED equalizer display. Now that was "Far Out".

And I definitely don't see how you can have that point of view on tomatoes grown in Mexico. I mean come on, have you tested those slimy nasty things? Of course all tomatoes are that way to me but that is beside the point.

 

[dawgface]

Reverse engineering or exact replica faux products like Rolex, Louis Vitton bags are not in the same ball park.

I'm not saying they are ok, they just require more advanced discussion and information that a simple stolen "point and click" software theft can elaborate on. I am not one that is informed enough to say anything on the subject of Microsoft, Macintosh or Mexico Tomatoes. Whaty I can promise you is both Microsoft and Macintosh have the means to support and protect their products form other American companies. Why they haven't in this case is suspect to more than than just a good sentance used as an example in this thread.

If you have literature on the topic I'd love to read up on it.....

 

[skriz]

rdnelson99;773193 wrote: In an effort to determine my correct status in society am I correct in interpreting your statement to say that unless I meet a certain income level, this hobby is above my means? Does that also mean that I should not frequent your establishment any longer because I obviously cannot afford you?

I knew my response would be taken in that light.. You are incorrect in your interpretation. I never said this hobby is above your means, nor did I qualify a certain income level. I stated that IF you cannot afford a product, then you do not have the right to steal it (or buy a stolen one at a lower cost). I just don't feel it's right to do so. Just as if you had an invention, you wouldn't want someone to steal it.

Let's shift to a hypothetical: the iPad. Let's say a company stole the design and released the iPadd. I don't think it's right to buy to iPadd knowing it was stolen from Apple. I don't think it's right to seek it out and hope someone steals the iPad and makes it available for cheaper since they had no investment in R&D, etc. If I can't afford the iPad, I should do without, rather than buying the knock-off.

To the second part of your statement: you are welcome at my establishment at any time, if you're buying or browsing or even sight-seeing! BUT, if you are going to steal from my establishment, then YES, please stay out!

rdnelson99;773193 wrote: I am also curious what platform you are using to access this forum. Is it a Microsoft based platform? If so, are you not also supporting theft of intellectual property? I am pretty comfortable in my belief that most informed people would recognize that Microsoft Windows was pirated from Macintosh. Yet, for a time in history, Microsoft was heralded as the pinnacle in American ingenuity and success. And, if by chance you are using a touch screen cell phone that is not manufactured by Apple does that not also make you a thief?

Apple iPhone. And if the exact replica was made available, I would not buy it.