China should find a smarter way to copy
Nobody could accuse Don Evans of slacking in his last days on the job. As George W. Bush prepared last week for the inauguration of his second term as president, the outgoing US commerce secretary was in China, complaining about the prevalence of intellectual property theft and demanding that counterfeiters be jailed.
Along with pirated DVDs and software, and imitations of Duracell batteries and Viagra, he was indignant about the Chery QQ, a car made in Anhui Province that looks very like the Chevrolet Spark. General Motors has sued Chery for mimicking the Matiz, a small car produced by Daewoo, its South Korean partner (the Matiz sells in China as the Spark).
There is certainly a lot of piracy in China, although it is hard to get too worked up about something that has always been endemic in emerging markets, including 19th century America. After Eli Whitney invented the cotton gin in 1793, his patent was breached by many Southern plantation owners, who relied on lax local courts turning a blind eye to piracy. For US southern states then, read China's inland provinces today.
The thing that distinguishes 21st century from 19th century American business is not the lack of imitation, but the rules that govern it. Copying, in the sense of taking ideas and techniques from others, is an essential part of capitalist enterprise: without it, there would be less competition and consumers would be worse off. The trick is to take from others without stealing their property.
Chinese companies have plenty to learn about that. Paul Gao, a principal with McKinsey in Shanghai, ascribes some of today's attitudes to practices during previous iterations of Communist rule. When a state-owned enterprise invented a product under Mao Zedong's regime, it was often told to share the blueprints with a factory in another province.
Piracy, however, only gets the pirate so far. It may be a costly nuisance to those companies with easy-to-steal products the International Intellectual Property Alliance estimates that DVDs, software and books with a face value of $2.6bn (￡1.4bn) were copied in China in 2003 but the back-street copiers are no closer to being able to write their own software code or their own novels.
Chery's QQ falls into a similar category: Chery admits that the car is similar to the Spark, but says that it acquired rights to the Matiz legally. “The question is not whether they can keep on copying, because that is not a sustainable business model. It is how they can acquire the skills to make their own products,” says one motor industry executive.
Examining what competitors are doing is a good place to start. Not many companies invent wholly new products; most of them adapt and extend ideas that others have already tried. Apple's iPod was not the first MP3 player, but the company added enough to make its version innovative. Similarly, drugs companies often build on each other's breakthroughs to produce “me-too” drugs.
The Matiz itself was hardly an original product. Fiat had led the way in making city cars such as the Uno and the Panda, and Daewoo wanted to make its own version. It even hired the designer of the Panda and the Uno Giorgetto Giugiaro of Italdesign to draw up plans for the Matiz.
That provides another clue. Many companies buy-in external expertise and ideas to help them develop new products, rather than relying on their native genius. Drugs companies acquire the rights to new drugs discovered by biotechnology start-ups and big software companies buy small ones. This not only provides them with ideas for product development but exposes them to expertise.
One company in an emerging market that followed this path was Sony, which licensed the rights to a hearing aid transistor from Western Electric in 1953 (and had a coveted copy of Bell Laboratories' Transistor Technology manual thrown in). John Nathan's book Sony: The Private Life recounts how Sony's engineers eventually managed to adapt the transistor to make its first pocket radio.
Chinese companies have been less canny about acquiring skills. Many have fallen into the trap of trying to be too original to develop products from scratch, rather than combining what is available with their ideas. “They are not very good at commercialisation of R&D. They try to be completely self-reliant and do everything themselves,” says Mr Gao.
Somewhere between this purist approach and the pirating of others' products lies China's way ahead. There are already signs of companies taking steps in this direction. Shanghai Automotive is negotiating with Rover Group over a joint venture that would enable the Chinese company (a joint venture partner of GM in China) to produce its own range of cars for the Chinese domestic market.
Then there is Chery, which has commissioned European suppliers including another Italian design firm to help produce a range of new models to be sold in the US from 2007. “To complain about knock-offs is missing the point. There is a set of Chinese companies rushing towards us that is finding ways to develop products legitimately,” says Steve Young, an industry consultant.
There is no reason to think they will fail, even if it takes time. China has many engineers, a large domestic market and companies with plenty of money. Some have found it easier to pirate products than to bring ideas from the drawing-board to the market, but that can change. Their challenge is not to stop copying the west but to copy in a smarter way.
China should find a smarter way to copy
John Gapper
Published: January 20 2005 22:28 | Last updated: January 21 2005 22:28
Nobody could accuse Don Evans of slacking in his last days on the job. As George W. Bush prepared last week for the inauguration of his second term as president, the outgoing US commerce secretary was in China, complaining about the prevalence of intellectual property theft and demanding that counterfeiters be jailed.
Along with pirated DVDs and software, and imitations of Duracell batteries and Viagra, he was indignant about the Chery QQ, a car made in Anhui Province that looks very like the Chevrolet Spark. General Motors has sued Chery for mimicking the Matiz, a small car produced by Daewoo, its South Korean partner (the Matiz sells in China as the Spark).
There is certainly a lot of piracy in China, although it is hard to get too worked up about something that has always been endemic in emerging markets, including 19th century America. After Eli Whitney invented the cotton gin in 1793, his patent was breached by many Southern plantation owners, who relied on lax local courts turning a blind eye to piracy. For US southern states then, read China's inland provinces today.
The thing that distinguishes 21st century from 19th century American business is not the lack of imitation, but the rules that govern it. Copying, in the sense of taking ideas and techniques from others, is an essential part of capitalist enterprise: without it, there would be less competition and consumers would be worse off. The trick is to take from others without stealing their property.
Chinese companies have plenty to learn about that. Paul Gao, a principal with McKinsey in Shanghai, ascribes some of today's attitudes to practices during previous iterations of Communist rule. When a state-owned enterprise invented a product under Mao Zedong's regime, it was often told to share the blueprints with a factory in another province.
Piracy, however, only gets the pirate so far. It may be a costly nuisance to those companies with easy-to-steal products the International Intellectual Property Alliance estimates that DVDs, software and books with a face value of $2.6bn (￡1.4bn) were copied in China in 2003 but the back-street copiers are no closer to being able to write their own software code or their own novels.
Chery's QQ falls into a similar category: Chery admits that the car is similar to the Spark, but says that it acquired rights to the Matiz legally. “The question is not whether they can keep on copying, because that is not a sustainable business model. It is how they can acquire the skills to make their own products,” says one motor industry executive.
Examining what competitors are doing is a good place to start. Not many companies invent wholly new products; most of them adapt and extend ideas that others have already tried. Apple's iPod was not the first MP3 player, but the company added enough to make its version innovative. Similarly, drugs companies often build on each other's breakthroughs to produce “me-too” drugs.
The Matiz itself was hardly an original product. Fiat had led the way in making city cars such as the Uno and the Panda, and Daewoo wanted to make its own version. It even hired the designer of the Panda and the Uno Giorgetto Giugiaro of Italdesign to draw up plans for the Matiz.
That provides another clue. Many companies buy-in external expertise and ideas to help them develop new products, rather than relying on their native genius. Drugs companies acquire the rights to new drugs discovered by biotechnology start-ups and big software companies buy small ones. This not only provides them with ideas for product development but exposes them to expertise.
One company in an emerging market that followed this path was Sony, which licensed the rights to a hearing aid transistor from Western Electric in 1953 (and had a coveted copy of Bell Laboratories' Transistor Technology manual thrown in). John Nathan's book Sony: The Private Life recounts how Sony's engineers eventually managed to adapt the transistor to make its first pocket radio.
Chinese companies have been less canny about acquiring skills. Many have fallen into the trap of trying to be too original to develop products from scratch, rather than combining what is available with their ideas. “They are not very good at commercialisation of R&D. They try to be completely self-reliant and do everything themselves,” says Mr Gao.
Somewhere between this purist approach and the pirating of others' products lies China's way ahead. There are already signs of companies taking steps in this direction. Shanghai Automotive is negotiating with Rover Group over a joint venture that would enable the Chinese company (a joint venture partner of GM in China) to produce its own range of cars for the Chinese domestic market.
Then there is Chery, which has commissioned European suppliers including another Italian design firm to help produce a range of new models to be sold in the US from 2007. “To complain about knock-offs is missing the point. There is a set of Chinese companies rushing towards us that is finding ways to develop products legitimately,” says Steve Young, an industry consultant.
There is no reason to think they will fail, even if it takes time. China has many engineers, a large domestic market and companies with plenty of money. Some have found it easier to pirate products than to bring ideas from the drawing-board to the market, but that can change. Their challenge is not to stop copying the west but to copy in a smarter way.
中国应学会巧妙抄袭
没人能责备唐?埃文斯(Don Evans)在任上的最后几天有所懈怠。上周，当乔治?W?布什(George W. Bush)准备总统连任就职典礼时，这位即将离任的美国商务部长正在北京，抱怨侵权盗版泛滥，并要求将假冒者绳之以法。
除了盗版DVD和软件、以及假冒金霸王电池(Duracell)和伟哥(Viagra)外，他对安徽省生产的奇瑞(Chery)QQ汽车也十分气愤，此车与雪佛莱(Chevrolet)的Spark非常相像。通用汽车公司(General Motors)已起诉奇瑞仿造Matiz。Matiz是由通用的韩国合作伙伴大宇(Daewoo)生产的一款小型车(在中国销售时称为Spark)。
新兴市场的通病
中国确实存在许多盗版问题，但这是新兴市场的一种通病，连19世纪的美国也不例外，不值得让人大动肝火。1793年埃利?惠特尼(Eli Whitney)发明轧棉机后，就有许多南方种植园主侵犯其专利，而他们所依仗的正是执法不严的地方法院对侵权行为的视若无睹。要想了解当时美国南部各州的情况，只需看看今天中国的内陆省份。
21世纪美国商业与19世纪的区别，并不在于仿冒减少，而在于规范仿冒的规则。如果是指从他人那里获取点子和方法，抄袭是资本主义企业的有机组成部分。没有抄袭，竞争将会减少，不利于消费者。诀窍在于仿效他人但不窃取他们的产权。
诀窍在于仿效他人但不窃取产权
中国公司在这方面需要学习的地方很多。麦肯锡(McKinsey)上海分公司负责人高旭(Paul Gao)将现今的一些态度归因于毛泽东时代的做法。那时国有企业发明新产品后，往往被要求与其他省份的工厂共享设计图。
然而，盗版者借助盗版所能取得的成就终究是有限的。对那些生产易于被盗版产品的公司来说，盗版或许是损失严重的麻烦。国际知识产权联盟(International Intellectual Property Alliance)估计，2003年，中国盗版DVD、软件和书籍的价值达26亿美元，但假冒者还是根本无力编写自己的软件或小说。
奇瑞QQ的情形与之相似。奇瑞承认该轿车与Spark相似，但却称自己从Matiz合法获得了产权。一位汽车业的主管说：“问题并不在于它们能否继续抄袭，因为这不是可持续的商业模式。问题在于他们如何才能获取技术来制造自己的产品。”
研究竞争对手
有一个很好的出发点，就是研究竞争对手是怎么做的。很少有公司能发明全新的产品，多数是改进并延伸他人的创意。苹果电脑(Apple)的ipod并非第一款MP3播放器，但是该公司充分融入了新特色，使其具有创新性。同样，制药公司经常互相利用突破性成果，生产仿制药。
Matiz本身并非原创产品。菲亚特(Fiat)率先生产了乌诺(Uno)和熊猫(Panda)等城市小型车，而大宇有意制造自己的版本。它甚至聘请了熊猫和乌诺的设计师，Italdesign公司的乔治?亚罗(Giorgetto Giugiaro)来为Matiz 起草设计。
买下技术和创意
这提供了另一条线索。许多公司从外部买入专门技术和创意来帮助其开发新产品，而非依靠公司内部的人才。制药公司从生物技术初创公司购得新药产权，大型软件公司则并购小的软件公司。这不仅为其提供了产品开发的创意，而且使其获得专门技术。
新兴市场中走这条路的公司之一便是索尼(Sony)。1953年，它从西电公司(Western Electric)获得助听器晶体管的使用许可权(并获赠令人垂涎的贝尔实验室(Bell Laboratories)晶体管技术手册的复本)。约翰?内森(John Nathan)所著《索尼的私人生活》(Sony: The Private Life)一书，叙述了索尼工程师最终将晶体管用于生产第一款袖珍收音机的故事。
中国企业在获取技术上一直不太精明。许多公司未将现有成果与自己的创意相结合，反而掉入了开发产品时一味求新而从零做起的陷阱。高先生说：“他们不太擅长对研发成果进行商业化利用。他们试图完全靠自己，每件事都自己做。”
中国企业的出路
中国的出路介于这种纯粹主义做法与侵权盗版之间。现有迹象表明，一些公司正朝这个方向发展。上海汽车工业(集团)总公司(Shanghai Automotive)正与罗孚集团(Rover Group)洽谈建立合资企业，从而使这家中国公司(通用汽车在中国的合资伙伴)能够为国内市场生产自己的系列轿车。
而奇瑞也已委托欧洲供应商，包括另一家意大利设计公司，帮助其生产一系列新车型，以便从2007年开始在美国销售。汽车业咨询师史蒂夫?扬(Steve Young)说：“一味抱怨假冒品并未抓住问题的关键。许多中国公司跑到我们这里，急于找到合法开发产品的办法。”
没有理由相信他们会失败，即便这需要时间。中国拥有众多的工程师、巨大的国内市场和资金充裕的企业。有些人发现，侵权盗版比把创意推向市场的过程简单得多，但这会发生变化。他们所面对的挑战，并非停止抄袭西方产品，而是寻找更巧妙的抄袭途径。
