Chinese Aviation Industry

[latenlazy]

Unless the subsystems are manufactured in China, they are NOT effectively from local suppliers. Any imports from the West can easily be sanctioned.

I think Comac would be stupid to starve a truly local supplier by giving money to a US company instead.

No they are not counted domestic if they are from JVs. Who owns the IP, who knows the manufacturing process, is the JV owned 49-51/50-50/51-49, does the contract say full ToT or partial ToT, how much is the domestic company of the Joint Venture allowed to iterate/improve on the design, what are the terms of the license, if COMAC wants to sell an aircraft to a sanctioned country can the domestic owner provide parts or will the overseas company block the transaction due to their laws in their country (US national security concerns, EU human right blabla etc)

So unless the domestic supply company involved in the JV has a FULL ownership of the IP and is able to sell to anyone without any sanction concerns then i would say that's a domestic supplier in name but a foreign supplier in reality.

Now if they managed their contract to have the above terms then good job but I doubt it that the other countries would allow full ToT

Never heard of China ignoring IP protections when the geopolitical climate gets dicey before. If geopolitics is what prevents foreign sales I guarantee you IP won’t be the decisive point of restriction.

 

[voyager1]

Never heard of China ignoring IP protections when the geopolitical climate gets dicey before. If geopolitics is what prevents foreign sales I guarantee you IP won’t be the decisive point of restriction.

Come on, is that a serious discussion? China can ignore IP protections if it wants but it must always find a plausible reason and now is getting increasingly harder than lets say the wild west of the 2000s. Now is not that easy due to extreme strategic competition with the US, if China attempts something with IP, then it would be fair game for other countries to break IP owned by Chinese companies. And lets not forget how much IP Chinese companies own in the BRI.

Serious discussion please. China is not an untouchable giant. If it wants to play dirty then expect the US to do the same x2 harder

 

[latenlazy]

Come on, is that a serious discussion? China can ignore IP protections if it wants but it must always find a plausible reason and now is getting increasingly harder than lets say the wild west of the 2000s. Now is not that easy due to extreme strategic competition with the US, if China attempts something with IP, then it would be fair game for other countries to break IP owned by Chinese companies. And lets not forget how much IP Chinese companies own in the BRI.

Serious discussion please. China is not an untouchable giant. If it wants to play dirty then expect the US to do the same x2 harder

Did I miss something or is the *whole* premise of your argument that China should expect the US to play dirty? If that’s the case already then why should China be worried about the doing the same 2x harder?

 

[voyager1]

Did I miss something or is the *whole* premise of your argument that China should expect the US to play dirty? If that’s the case already then why should China be worried about the doing the same 2x harder?

Who said that, did you read my post properly? IP laws is like the nuclear MAD, nobody is going to break IP intentionally without plausible explanations because then the whole world will become like wild west.
US doesn't want it to happen as their companies are more value added and this value is based entirely upon IP.
China doesn't want it because they are already invested in many poor 3rd world countries with corrupted politics, can you imagine what would happen if China broke IP laws, every dictator and half would start openly cheating and stealing. In addition there are all internationally binding agreements China has signed, CAI, RCEP, WTO which stipulate IP protection.

And lets not forget that the EU which is "neutral" to the US-China rivalry depends on much lower value added companies like the US. If we broke IP, the most affected would be the EU as China is already starting to eat into EU's lunch, so dont be surprised if EU and US would team up and grind China's economy to the ground.

Let me repeat this again, IP laws is like nuclear MAD, China is playing into the large superpower club now and will not be allowed to play the same dirty tricks as it did a decade ago. Dont expect any more discussion about this topic as I find this discussion extremely naive and not worth anymore of my.time to counter argue

 

[canniBUS]

Who said that, did you read my post properly? IP laws is like the nuclear MAD, nobody is going to break IP intentionally without plausible explanations because then the whole world will become like wild west.
US doesn't want it to happen as their companies are more value added and this value is based entirely upon IP.
China doesn't want it because they are already invested in many poor 3rd world countries with corrupted politics, can you imagine what would happen if China broke IP laws, every dictator and half would start openly cheating and stealing. In addition there are all internationally binding agreements China has signed, CAI, RCEP, WTO which stipulate IP protection.

And lets not forget that the EU which is "neutral" to the US-China rivalry depends on much lower value added companies like the US. If we broke IP, the most affected would be the EU as China is already starting to eat into EU's lunch, so dont be surprised if EU and US would team up and grind China's economy to the ground.

Let me repeat this again, IP laws is like nuclear MAD, China is playing into the large superpower club now and will not be allowed to play the same dirty tricks as it did a decade ago. Dont expect any more discussion about this topic as I find this discussion extremely naive and not worth anymore of my.time to counter argue

Intellectual property is rent seeking that robs society of its wealth, a cage placed around human thought. We need a GNU license equivalent for patents and trademarks so that ideas a transmitted instead of locked up.

 

[latenlazy]

Who said that, did you read my post properly? IP laws is like the nuclear MAD, nobody is going to break IP intentionally without plausible explanations because then the whole world will become like wild west.
US doesn't want it to happen as their companies are more value added and this value is based entirely upon IP.
China doesn't want it because they are already invested in many poor 3rd world countries with corrupted politics, can you imagine what would happen if China broke IP laws, every dictator and half would start openly cheating and stealing. In addition there are all internationally binding agreements China has signed, CAI, RCEP, WTO which stipulate IP protection.

And lets not forget that the EU which is "neutral" to the US-China rivalry depends on much lower value added companies like the US. If we broke IP, the most affected would be the EU as China is already starting to eat into EU's lunch, so dont be surprised if EU and US would team up and grind China's economy to the ground.

Let me repeat this again, IP laws is like nuclear MAD, China is playing into the large superpower club now and will not be allowed to play the same dirty tricks as it did a decade ago. Dont expect any more discussion about this topic as I find this discussion extremely naive and not worth anymore of my.time to counter argue

So...you’re worried about the US revoking China’s access to IP if China violates IP protections...but you’re also worried about China being blocked from access to IP if China doesn’t violate IP protections? Aren’t those both the same “MAD” conditions? But if the US is going to block China’s access to foreign technology with or without China violating IP, then what’s the big deal with China violating IP?

 

[Deino]

Guys ... can we stop this political discussion!

 

[KYli]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[gadgetcool5]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Aboulafia believes it would be difficult for China to replace US aviation technology and be even harder for it to innovate behind closed doors. A decoupling in the aviation sector could mean the US may miss out on the biggest growth market in the world, but China could also end up “with an inferior, inward-looking state-owned system that echoes the Soviet industry experience”, Aboulafia said.

“There is zero chance China could be self-sufficient in commercial aircraft manufacturing in the next 30-40 years. Nor should they be. No one is fully self-sufficient, not even the US or [European Union]. Specialisation makes sense,” said Kennedy.

 

[voyager1]

Aboulafia believes it would be difficult for China to replace US aviation technology and be even harder for it to innovate behind closed doors. A decoupling in the aviation sector could mean the US may miss out on the biggest growth market in the world, but China could also end up “with an inferior, inward-looking state-owned system that echoes the Soviet industry experience”, Aboulafia said.

“There is zero chance China could be self-sufficient in commercial aircraft manufacturing in the next 30-40 years. Nor should they be. No one is fully self-sufficient, not even the US or [European Union]. Specialisation makes sense,” said Kennedy.

Haha 30-40 years???

Delusional people, imagine thinking that the Chinese would need 30-40 years to be self-sufficient in the aerospace sector..

I would give it a maximum of 10 to 15 years