Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RealMuLan who wrote (18485)	3/11/2004 9:22:42 PM
From: Elroy Jetson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

I understand completely that the transfers are voluntary. The American companies are naive enough to believe China will respect their ownership of intellectual property, even though there has not been one documented case where China has refrained from appropriating technology which comes their way. American executives call this clever off-shoring to lower costs. In the process of doing so, the real ownership of their business is transferred to more competent owners whose business goals are based on strategic decisions rather than myopic short-term profit goals and economic fairy tales. Self-appointed political Commissars such as Grace Zaccardi are more than willing to sell out their nation in return for a few moments of notoriety and some cheap Chinese trinkets from Walmart.

To: RealMuLan who wrote (18485)	3/11/2004 9:51:28 PM
From: Amy J	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

Yiwu, RE: "Thief? No one forces the US technology firms to transfer their technology." Are you saying stealing is acceptable? The issue is with whomever steals IP, not with the owner of the IP. The thief is wrong, regardless of their country, and the victim is not to be blamed, regardless of what country they are from. RE: "It is all completely done on a voluntary basis." Personally, I think Bush should create a full-blown trade war with China in order to change two things: a) enforcement of IP laws b) modification of the 51% Chinese mandated ownership of USA technology when selling in China, especially given the IP theft. This is my belief, regardless of which country. And is precisely why my startup selected a different country to do our offshoring. Our wise BODs wouldn't allow us to foolishly give our IP to a country that doesn't enforce IP laws and in the same breadth requires a majority ownership. Good grief. In other words, replace China with Country ABC and my principles a) and b) above hold true and are consistent and independent of the country. It just so happens that China is currently a country that happens to be violating my principles. I would hope they change this. And if you truly cared about China's future, you would too. People I know that are from China and living there, actually have the same opinion as me - they would prefer to see IP theft cleaned up in their country. This isn't good for them either. Regards, Amy J

To: RealMuLan who wrote (18485)	3/12/2004 12:44:38 AM
From: bentway	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

The Chinese just hang us by our own greed. GM doesn't mind (enough to rock the boat) about the Cherry, because the market is so huge, they figure they'll sell all they make anyway. If GM didn't do it, the Chinese would just partner with another automaker that would.