Replica Cervelo S5

junglist_matty

I should be making replica's out of carboard!? At least If I state it's a "replica P5" I'm not avoiding the truth!

£510 ...Can get a very good frame for that price!

Yesterday in the LBS I noticed a (red & white) carbon Trek (some TT bike, can't remember model) listed for £1500, looked pretty decent and I'm 100% sure it would ride a lot better than some cr@p chinese replica; if I were in the market for one, I know where I'd put my money; especially £500!!!

imposter2.0

I just bought a MiG-19 - turns out it was actually a Shenyang F6 - gutted..!!

diy

Clearly people don't understand the law here.

There are two relevant laws relating to IPR and a further one relating to the act of passing a fake off as gunuine:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1994/26/contents
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/contents
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/35/contents

There are two parts to making a "replica" whether it be bib tights or a bike frame.

1st - you copy the logos and colour scheme of the item that you are intending to fake. This is covered by the Trade Marks Act 1994.

So if I made something that was different in look and design, but copies the colour scheme and logo's its the trade marks act which will get me.

2nd - you copy the design of the item. Here the copyright design and patents act gets you, because the design itself is copyright and some of the specifics of the design may be patented too.

So a Dogma without Pinarello stickers - generic frame, is still problematic as its a copy of a copyrighted and potentially patented design. In addition a product that is substantially different, but has infringing use of trademarks is also problematic. One that is a straight copy infringes both. One that is a straight copy sold as genuine or not disclosed as fake is also fraud, in addition to breach of contract.

Both acts allow civil remedy in addition to criminal prosecutions. Civil remedy for all is tort (legal wrong), breach of contract etc.

So if you have a chinarello with or without stickers, it can be siezed and destroyed and you can be liable for the court costs in doing so. In addition if you knowingly sell it on (even if you represent it as a replica) you may be committing a criminal offence. Further if you pass a fake off as genuine you are also committing fraud.

And if you list them in classifieds - you are also making BR a party to the claim, so I'm sure they will be as happy about it as the persons who's IP was stolen.

VTech

I think one of the main issues with counterfeit and fake is the unwillingness of the police to act and the prosecution service to prosecute.
They seem adamant on taxable revenue like alcohol and cigarettes but not so on the usual fake items.

diy

That is true, but plenty of lawfirms will offer packaged services to go after the end consumer. We've seen it with photography, where website owners are sent a "license fee" of £1-10k to cover the use of a picture that they unwittingly used from a website template database.

Nothing to stop a firm tracking down buyers of fakes and offering them a similar deal.

In fact I'm thinking this might be an opportunity. I can see the avg. sucker coughing up £150-300 to avoid paying, £200-500 court costs and having their bike destroyed. Could even offer them a discount if they dobbed the seller in too.

Could probably automate this... :twisted:

Strith

VTech wrote:

Strith wrote:

Counterfeit/copy/replica/similar design whats the real difference? You telling me there's a single person on earth who would buy this under the assumption it was an original Farsports design?

http://www.farsports.cn/ViewProduct.aspx?id=667

But your arguing against something im not talking about.

Farsports are selling a frame that is copied in design but is not counterfeit so although they are, lets call it cloning it doesnt mean they are reducing quality and in fact, as I have proven to myself, the quality is superb.

Companies who intentionally go out to deceive by counterfeit often cut corners, in fact I would guess in the majority this is the case, and as such the product has a much higher risk of failure and therefor is more likely to be dangerous.

Listen, its up to you if you want to buy counterfeit or condone the selling of counterfeit but for me its a define no go area.

I think you're ony kidding yourself if you really think there is any difference between the quality of the frames from the likes of FS/HF/DF/MS and the like when compared what you call those sold by counterfeiters. From everything I've read across various boards, all I can see is that they are all coming from the same 6-8 factories in china.

I actually don't care where people buy their stuff from, but that chinarello from FS is a rip off. If you justify buying your products from rip off merchants based on the fact they only copy the design rather than put stickers on them, then go for it.

VTech

I have purchased a set of wheels, from a recommendation on this forum. Im kidding no one, I was always going to have them checked out which worked out well. I fear that you are justifying counterfeit under the guise that they all come from the same source and in fact you are right in part.
In the automotive industry there is a brand of air filters made from carbon that are made in china and sell for around £900-£1800 on average and they were so peeved at being ripped that they ripped themself and make the fakes in house.
They sell a similar brand in identical design but with a cheaper weave and a different name and a third of the price so they cover all areas of the market but you are not grasping my point.

You may be right, in fact you may be right at 99% of the time with your reference but imagine if you are the unlucky 1% who rides a bike at 30mph and it breaks in 2 !
Your idealistic view wont help you in intensive care.

I have taken more flak on this forum than most for my views on cyclists being ripped off and find it weird im now arguing with someone about wanting to buy genuine but when safety is at stake there is no room for compromise.

Anonymous

VTech wrote:

You may be right, in fact you may be right at 99% of the time with your reference but imagine if you are the unlucky 1% who rides a bike at 30mph and it breaks in 2 !
Your idealistic view wont help you in intensive care.

And so rests the case of everyone posting on this thread with respect to the safety of your wheels.

You are in the 99% but fortunate enough to have the facilities to check them out. What if you were in the 1% and weren't in such a fortunate position?

Better still, the 1%, got them checked out, found they were worthless, then posted a thread saying HOW CAN THEY SELL THIS TO PEOPLE WHEN IT IS UNSAFE FOR USE.

ooermissus

Surely the risk of a life-threatening frame failure is dwarfed by other risks on the road, which are the same however expensive the bike.

VTech

The difference is, due to the fact that I purchased from a company with what I found to be a reliable background I felt comfortable in the purchase, Has I purchased counterfeit from eBay I would not have done (in fact even if it came from a reliable source I just wouldnt buy counterfeit anyway).

I struggle to see why you guys justify counterfeit, its very odd and something ive never come across and ive travelled a fair bit and met many people !
Ive never spoken to anyone face to face who has justified counterfeit though.

Anonymous

The same guy sells the same stuff on ebay, from the same factory - with or without stickers (the buyer can specify).

How do you not get this?

VTech

Ive asked you to show me, can anyone show me ?

Strith

VTech wrote:

I fear that you are justifying counterfeit under the guise that they all come from the same source and in fact you are right in part.

I'm not justifying buying counterfeit frames to anyone, I was simply trying to point out to you that in reality there is no difference between the quality of what you term a replica and what you call a counterfeit. I just thought you seemed to think that FS are vastly safer just because they are a little less dishonest.

VTech wrote:

You may be right, in fact you may be right at 99% of the time with your reference but imagine if you are the unlucky 1% who rides a bike at 30mph and it breaks in 2 !
Your idealistic view wont help you in intensive care.

I should say I don't own anything from any of these carbon chinese manufacturers, all of my bikes are made in Taiwan by cannondale/spesh etc. But I think you're missing the point again, i.e. there is no 1%!

Strith

Out of interest vtec, how did your guys conclude your wheels are safe other than by looking at them?

diy

I think if you approach it as if second hand goods from an overseas ebayer then you can value them accordingly.

Attitude to business, quality, life, liability etc in china are very different to the western world.

VTech

They use an ultrasound device for stress cracks and imperfections within the carbon.


Also, as I stated much earlier, try telling the countless people who buy counterfeit and die each year that there really is no 1%, they wont be as willing to communicate in a sensible manor as I have.

http://atimes.com/atimes/China_Business/JH01Cb01.html

jane90

There seems to be a confusion of two separate issues in this thread

1. Theft of intellectual property.
2. Dangerously manufactured goods.

There seems to me to be no a priori reason why one follows from the other and if you think there is, then you should explain why. Just saying, "all manufacturers who try not to deceive their customers will manufacture to a higher standard of quality than those who do" seems to me to be a gross assumption that requires justification.

Strith

VTech wrote:

They use an ultrasound device for stress cracks and imperfections within the carbon.


Also, as I stated much earlier, try telling the countless people who buy counterfeit and die each year that there really is no 1%, they wont be as willing to communicate in a sensible manor as I have.

http://atimes.com/atimes/China_Business/JH01Cb01.html

You're still missing the point though. I'm not talking about fake cigarettes, eggs, gameboys or anything else, only bike frames.

Attempting to tell people who have died using those counterfeit goods, that knock off bike frames are dangerous is pointlesss as, 1) There is no evidence they are as bad as you seem to think, 2) They're probably not looking for a bike frame at the moment as they are dead.

And you seem to bias your assumptions to help justify what you've spent your money on. You say you wont buy from counterfeiters yet you've bought wheels from probably the most well know copy cat of the lot.

VTech

I've never said that counterfeit frames are made badly. You guys need to read what I write, as with many people here, you take the bits you want to argue with and set about a tirade.
I have made myself very clear, if you guys want to buy counterfeit then fine, it is your choice. I on the other hand don't.

DavidJB

Yes I won and for only £510...what a bargain.

VTech

DavidJB wrote:

Yes I won and for only £510...what a bargain.

Tell me your kidding !

cerv52

DavidJB wrote:

Yes I won and for only £510...what a bargain.

If you did I feel sorry for you. Not a bargain at all as its not covered by any warranty and you have no idea what the quality of the carbon is or how its been laid up. Lets hope it doesn't break whilst your doing any kind of speed on it as it could get nasty!

Will you be honest with your mates and tell them its fake or lie and pretend its genuine, your only kidding yourself! Enjoy LOL

diy

jane90 wrote:

There seems to be a confusion of two separate issues in this thread

1. Theft of intellectual property.
2. Dangerously manufactured goods.

There seems to me to be no a priori reason why one follows from the other and if you think there is, then you should explain why. Just saying, "all manufacturers who try not to deceive their customers will manufacture to a higher standard of quality than those who do" seems to me to be a gross assumption that requires justification.

if you want to establish a business copying other peoples trade marks and designs to sell at a higher profit, why would you stop there? Why not use cheaper parts and manufacture to a lower standards, after all people are buying in to other peoples brand. if you want to build a business selling your own quality products then why not brand under your own brand and establish a reputation of your own? Its not logical to make a replica to the same quality as the genuine article.

diy

DavidJB wrote:

Yes I won and for only £510...what a bargain.

just curious why you didn't buy new for £400 which is the price they sell at.

Strith

VTech wrote:

I've never said that counterfeit frames are made badly.

M'kay

DavidJB

Guys please don't be jealous of my uber new Cervelo!

d87francis

I'm uber jealous. Perhaps we could let VTech borrow it? I'm guessing he doesn't own a bike as how would he have the time to wind up so many on bikeradar?

Strith

It sounds amazing you lucky bugger, let us know if it melts in the rain though.

DavidJB

I'll give you a ride report when it arrives tomorrow. I've also brought some genuine brand new 3t bars, seatposts and stems off of ebay for a bargain 1/4 of retail price! You can get a right bargain on ebay!

VTech

d87francis wrote:

I'm uber jealous. Perhaps we could let VTech borrow it? I'm guessing he doesn't own a bike as how would he have the time to wind up so many on bikeradar?

What a stupid, idiotic reply.
How can you possibly suggest I'm winding people up for telling them not to buy counterfeit ?
I am not bothered if people want to pretend they can afford things they can't, I understand not everyone can afford a real cervello but to put your life into an unknown is stupid and reckless, who picks up the pieces if the buyer ends up in hospital, who tells your next of kin if the worst happens.

I only argue with you guys as its amusing for me, I do realise that some of you are so stupid you shouldn't have a child's bike yet alone be on a road but as I said, it's amusing.

If DavidJB really is the buyer at least let me get the frame tested before you out yourself on the back of it.