Tag Archives: Intellectual Property

China: Thanks for the intellectual property theft

Posted on by The Old Wolf

If you’ve followed or read my blog for any length of time, you know that I have this gut-level aversion to spammers, scammers, sleazy advertisers, and just about anyone who takes money from others by way of lies or deception. I execrate these people with the fury of a thousand O-type blue-hot suns.

O-type Blue star – average temperature 25,000 K.

Say hello to the Rinne Corporation, two guys who put their heads together and invented a better mousetrap.

Sit this bad boy on top of a 5-gallon bucket, bait the top, and watch the vermin enjoy their last slip-n-slide. For what it’s worth, I just ordered one from them this morning.

Naturally, Chinese businessmen who have all the ethics and morals of a starving honey badger saw these things, and as countless thousands of them do, ripped off the idea, started manufacturing knockoff copies, and selling them all over the Internet (including Amazon).

Amazon listings for the Flip-and-Slide bucket trap. Only the first one, from Rinne, is genuine. The others are cheap knockoffs from China for which Rinne gets no benefit.

Amazon states for the record that they are “trying” to shut down illegitimate storefronts, but based on results they are not putting a whole lot of real effort into it, and every day these scumbags exist on their website, they’re making money – so they don’t really have a lot of incentive to do much about it.

And of course the Chinese Communist Party encourages this theft of Intellectual property. National industrial policy goals in China encourage IP theft, and an extraordinary number of Chinese in business and government entities are engaged in this practice. There are also weaknesses and biases in the legal and patent systems that lessen the protection of foreign IP.

As the new Chinese leadership settles in, IPR issues loom. The fundamental question is whether the new leaders will confront the major societal and policy forces that continue to work against IPR. The patent and trade-secret legal environments, for example, require reform. The patent system encourages Chinese entities to copy and file foreign patents as if these patents were their own, and seems to establish the right of Chinese entities to sue the foreign, original inventor that seeks to sell the technology in China.

2013, The IP Commission Report (The Report of the Commission on the Theft of American Intellectual Property)

In 2021, based on what is being seen on the Internet and elsewhere, the problem is not only not being addressed, but is proliferating at an exponential rate. Facebook¹ doesn’t care; Google doesn’t care. They’ll happily take money from deceptive advertisers without a second thought.

Mobile ads presented on a search for “tip bucket mouse trap original

The first company (feelmoob.com, great name right?) has its mailing address in Reykjavik, Iceland, with tech support listed in Burundi, according to ICANN. The second, “Find Good Gear” makes no attempt at misdirection but is registered in China. The third one, Kellyys.com, appears to be an identical copy of the first one with only the name differing. All three websites have the following somewhere:

MADE IN USA –  We are a very small family-owned manufacturing company which started out in our home garage. We now own a large warehouse where we manufacture and hand package our products. Support American Business

Even with access to a Roget’s Thesaurus (both in hard copy and online), I do not have words enough to express how badly this kind of repugnant jiggery-pokery enrages me. Sales by theft of property, sales by outright lies and deception are the hallmark of China’s business model, and there’s not a thing honest businesspeople can do about it. Our government works so ponderously that by the time anything is done (and what is done will be a pathetic, watered-down version of what should be done), the criminal enterprises will have made a fortune, disappeared into the mist, and reappeared under a new name selling a new pirated product.

The only thing consumers can do is take the time to make sure they are buying from American companies, and preferably the originators of products they see. It takes time and effort, but if we’re ever going to turn the tide against conglomerates who outsource everything overseas, it will be worth it.

The Old Wolf has spoken.²

Footnotes

¹ The following is an example of a Facebook ad that I see almost daily:

Every single one begins with a variation of “We are sad to announce that we are closing our collection.” This is the purest horse 💩, and people fall for it in droves. This is similar to the signs I see periodically – there used to be an outfit in San Francisco’s Chinatown that had one of these on their storefront for years:

They’re closing their collection all right… and they’ll be back next week under a new name, peddling the same cheaply-made and overpriced stuff that they are now.

And that’s not to mention the ever-present teeshirt vendors who photoshop celebrities into their ads for products with stolen, unauthorized artwork. As the linked website says,

When those products are infringing on copyrights, or are misappropriating celebrity images, it’s incumbent on Facebook to crack down on them.

But they’re not, because it hurts their bottom line when they do.

Pissed off!

² if you don’t like what I’ve said here, complain on your own blog. This is not a place for debate.

Please do not patronize these knockoff companies.

Posted on by The Old Wolf

I followed a link from Facebook to a CNN article about Roger Stone on my phone yesterday. Almost invariably when I follow links, despite the fact that I own a Pixel phone I’ll choose the option that says “Open in Samsung Internet” because that app includes an ad-blocker that makes my mobile browsing experience infinitely less annoying (no, I’m not a paid shill.) But this time I didn’t for some odd reason, and this is what I saw:

These shirts and many like them are advertised heavily on Facebook and other places. This particular article repeated the same advertisement four times – with the headers “Star Wars,” “Star Wars 2,” “Star Wars 3,” and “Star Wars 9.”

It seems that the way targeted advertising campaigns work is that the page owners – in this case, CNN – either have no control over or don’t care what ads get served up on their site, as long as they get paid for eyeballs and clicks. So whatever algorithm was being used here, it has been heavily skewed in favor of this one company.

Aside from being annoying in general, these web ads for teeshirts have a darker downside: almost all of them use stolen and unauthorized intellectual property. While I can’t say for certain, my bookie assures me it’s a sure bet that these are Chinese companies who change their store names on a daily basis, saturate the internet with ads for shirts of dubious quality using pirated IP, sell a mess of teeshirts and then vanish before they can be tracked down, only to appear the next day under a different name.

And of course, concerns like Facebook are happy to rake in their advertising dollars without a care in the world.

There are many legitimate shirt companies out there. They purchase artwork or license it from its creators. Woot! is one that my wife and I are shamefacedly addicted to, but there are any number to choose from. ¹

Don’t give these pirates your money. Stick with legitimate companies, preferably ones that manufacture their goods here in America.

The Old Wolf has spoken.

¹ Nope, not getting paid for this recommendation either.

An Unsettling Quandary

Posted on by The Old Wolf

I love my blogs. I love sharing interesting things with my friends; there’s so much fascinating stuff out there on the net that I think people would enjoy seeing. I haven’t gone the Pinterest route, and probably never will – it just seems too chaotic. And when I do post something, I usually try to track it back to its original source, which is often several blogs deep.

Now comes Roni Loren, with a sad tale of being set upon by hordes of attorneys bearing pitchforks and torches… well, probably only one, but you get the idea. And she really-o, truly-o got sued by a real-live photographer for violating his copyright, even though she immediately removed the photo after the initial takedown notice. And once the lawyers get involved, you don’t ever get the mushroom cloud back into that pretty little silver sphere.

Here’s what she learned about fair use from the experience (more details at her blog post):

“It DOESN’T MATTER…

  • if you link back to the source and list the photographer’s name
  • if the picture is not full-sized (only thumbnail size is okay)
  • if you did it innocently
  • if your site is non-commercial and you made no money from the use of the photo
  • if you didn’t claim the photo was yours
  • if you’ve added commentary in addition to having the pic in the post
  • if the picture is embedded and not saved on your server
  • if you have a disclaimer on your site.
  • if you immediately take down a pic if someone sends you a DMCA notice (you do have to take it down, but it doesn’t absolve you.)”

This bothers me. Ms. Loren was neither claiming copyright of someone else;s work nor attempting to monetize it, as in the case of FunnyJunk.com; in fact, she specifically gave copyright to the owners of anything she posted. I stand for intellectual property rights – I contributed to Matt Inman’s campaign to raise money for charity and embarrass supreme douchebag Charles Carreon at the same time (the entire saga is analyzed in delicious detail over at Popehat) – but I don’t stand for being a jerk; there are more human ways of handling things like this.

Case in point: some years ago, a forum I participated in was infested by the most repugnant of subhumans, the cyber-trolls. From their safe chairs of anonymity, they vomited their filth and abomination into what had become a thriving, supportive and civil community, and ultimately resulted in its demise in that venue. They may be happy with the lulz they got, but all they did was cover themselves with more shame. As a response to their actions, I wrote this little piece of nonsense, which served no greater purpose than to help me get some feelings off my chest. Later I found copies elsewhere, with no attribution, specifically here and here; I posted a comment in the first forum requesting either attribution or removal, and was pointedly ignored. My request was even deleted.

I could have gone all Clarence Darrow on these people, but what’s the point? It’s not like I’m going to make a dime off a bit of nonsense rhyme, and parody of a great author at that. Much easier to just let it go. Unfortunately in today’s society, with 47 lawyers per capita looking for billable hours, anyone with half a beef can find an attorney to cheer him one, and I think that’s sad.

So I end up being vulnerable, because if I change the nature of this blog, it simply ceases to exist, and I’m not willing to give it up. I will, however, in future posts link to a disclaimer something like this:

THIS BLOG claims no credit for any images posted on this site unless otherwise noted. Images on this blog are copyright to its respectful owners. If there is an image appearing on this blog that belongs to you and do not wish for it appear on this site, please E-mail with a link to said image and it will be promptly removed.

Despite the fact that Ms. Loren has been terrorized into sharing nuthin’ with nobody without 100% air-tight attribution – and, in light of her experience and given how nasty lawyers can be, I can’t blame her – I’m not ready to go that route. I can only hope and pray that I don’t encounter the one person in ten thousand who is willing to sell their humanity for a mess of pottage.

The Old Wolf has spoken.