Fake Chinese bike parts

[dyna-ti]

Crumbs. Didnt mean to start anything

My point is with these(lets call them reproductions) there is no way to differentiate between an original and a reproduction.

So for example, i could buy a set of reproduction Ringle skewers, then sell them down the line as being nos originals at a premium price, and the buyer would be none the wiser. I could rightly be accused of being a counterfeiter, even though i didnt actually make them, i did buy from a source, from what could be classed as a middleman and passed them on knowing they werent genuine.

Now the argument about whether infringement has taken place is correct, but on both points. I am pretty sure the reproductions sold on here, the seller(or maker) hasnt totted up his invoices at the end of the year and passed the requisite amount to the original manufacturer.
So if its produced in China,England,the US or anywhere in the world, it is still counterfeit and the seller is profiting from the retro market, and only for their own gain. Certainly nobody is going to great length to reproduce something that is rare and desirable for the good of the cycling world.

If it is reproduction, then there should be some way of showing it is reproduction, and not copied to the minute detail so nobody can tell real from reproduction apart.

PS
I also think its a bit tenuous to suggest racism is at play, its more as an indicator to its origin rather than an all encompassing slur on the Chinese people.

 

[bikeworkshop]

The initial aliexpress links were mostly to fake high end modern kit.

The guys on here are offering stuff you can't buy new anymore. let's call it repro.

Patents last for 20 years iirc, but obviously hard to enforce abroad - labelling with brand identity would be different, if the brand still exists.

Selling Fake or Repro stuff as genuine would be fraudulent.

 

[raidan73]

@Battersby, following a report regarding this thread I’ve read through the posts over the last few pages a couple of times now. I’m struggling to see anything that could be construed as racist, but maybe I’ve missed something. Would you please PM me or quote the post you feel is racist and I’ll moderate as required.

 

[The History Man]

I love everything.



Unless I get caught again.

 

[d8mok]

Crumbs. Didnt mean to start anything

My point is with these(lets call them reproductions) there is no way to differentiate between an original and a reproduction.

So for example, i could buy a set of reproduction Ringle skewers, then sell them down the line as being nos originals at a premium price, and the buyer would be none the wiser. I could rightly be accused of being a counterfeiter, even though i didnt actually make them, i did buy from a source, from what could be classed as a middleman and passed them on knowing they werent genuine.

Now the argument about whether infringement has taken place is correct, but on both points. I am pretty sure the reproductions sold on here, the seller(or maker) hasnt totted up his invoices at the end of the year and passed the requisite amount to the original manufacturer.
So if its produced in China,England,the US or anywhere in the world, it is still counterfeit and the seller is profiting from the retro market, and only for their own gain. Certainly nobody is going to great length to reproduce something that is rare and desirable for the good of the cycling world.

If it is reproduction, then there should be some way of showing it is reproduction, and not copied to the minute detail so nobody can tell real from reproduction apart.

PS
I also think its a bit tenuous to suggest racism is at play, its more as an indicator to its origin rather than an all encompassing slur on the Chinese people.

The repro Ringle skewers I’ve got have a R stamped on the back. They are identical apart from that to the originals.

 

[d8mok]

Very good point. However, and this is just my opinion only, if a bike manufacturer was producing and selling decals for old "£x" and copies were selling for half that price, I would probably use the term fake. But the fact getting genuine decals is near impossible I think reproduction fits the description much better.

Also as others have said there is a huge difference between reproducing a product that is no longer available and copying an available product to sell at reduced prices just make money by undercutting the genuine article.

I don’t like fake stuff. Whether it be watches , clothes, cars or bike parts. I don’t see the point in them but I do find it interesting the crossovers which are accepted.

For example - those people who build a F355 on a MR2 chassis are only fooling themselves and simply do it in the hope it makes them look like they have a Ferrari. But “7” type cars are accepted even through they aren’t a caterham or Westfield. I’ve owned one too but would never own a replica Ferrari or Lambo.

Decals - I have a massive hoard of brand new Spooky decals which are originals from Spooky. I also have some reproduction ones. It’s easy to tell one from the other when holding both as the repro ones are wrong in places. Are they fake? It’s accepted in our community that decals are repro unless someone actually says they are originals.


I’m being deliberately picky and argumentative just to raise debate on the o subject.

 

[bikeworkshop]

If your tired rusty old orange p7 gets a blast and paint, and you put new repro decals on it, it's still an orange p7. It just has new paint and decals, neither of which were original, so a vendor shouldn't claim they are.
That's more like new gear cables or tyres.

Not many bike brands will refinish a frame for you anyway.

We expect wearing components to be replaced without affecting the authenticity of the item, unless its described as New or (possibly) Mint

(I think a lot of people use the term "mint"to mean very shiny rather than "freshly minted" - so there's often a need to define terms. )

Some people might restore the original cable outers, others would replace if new ones were better.

 

[GTLoz]

I don’t like fake stuff. Whether it be watches , clothes, cars or bike parts. I don’t see the point in them but I do find it interesting the crossovers which are accepted.

For example - those people who build a F355 on a MR2 chassis are only fooling themselves and simply do it in the hope it makes them look like they have a Ferrari. But “7” type cars are accepted even through they aren’t a caterham or Westfield. I’ve owned one too but would never own a replica Ferrari or Lambo.

Decals - I have a massive hoard of brand new Spooky decals which are originals from Spooky. I also have some reproduction ones. It’s easy to tell one from the other when holding both as the repro ones are wrong in places. Are they fake? It’s accepted in our community that decals are repro unless someone actually says they are originals.


I’m being deliberately picky and argumentative just to raise debate on the o subject.

I think we are on the same page here. Car wise I completely agree, the mr2 based f355 just doesn't do it for me. But I would love a 7 or cobra replica because for me they would replicate the experience of an original rather than just the look.
Decals wise yes you can tell the difference between genuine and repro, but most of the time it just isn't possible to use genuine. Parts wise, I suppose someone could make the same argument, in that they can't afford or find a particular rare part they want for their build, therefore does that justify the use of repro. In my mind this is where it gets tricky, repro to get the overall look could be OK, but that part should not be branded as per the original. Taking it back to cars, it is widely accepted that the cobra replicas and 7 type cars exist and they are desirable in their own right.

 

[bikeworkshop]

There's a range with a clear right and wrong end.
We could all agree on where things are in the range,
but we each put our "line we won't cross" in different places.
Even the position of the law itself is a little blurred.

 

[al-onestare]

But thanks for throwing personal insults in as well...

Don't fret, that poster has form for that.