General > General Technical Chat
Does anyone recognise this Chinese moulded case - YORKTRON
<< < (6/9) > >>
Simon:

--- Quote from: floobydust on October 14, 2021, 08:00:00 pm ---
--- Quote from: Simon on October 14, 2021, 07:11:53 am ---[...] What applies to china applies to any country, trading has to be done largely on faith unless you have the money to sue and you have a contract that recognises a legal jurisdiction that may not be the one of the buyer or seller. It's as simple as that. [...]
--- End quote ---

I disagree, they do not comprehend the Rule of Law that defines the West. The "100 years of national humiliation" has rightfully resulted in angry nationalism that people need to be aware of. Copyright infringement? Theft of IP? Phone the police lol. The narrative is mistrust and bias against foreign entities, as they damaged the country many years ago.

I think it's impossible to talk about sourcing electronics components without the politics of developing nations coming up.
Nothing has impacted the global electronics profession as much as china and it's important to not be naive or have a gag order, and share the pitfalls.
I understand emotions, anger, hostility will cause a thread to crash'n burn though.

Imagine sourcing this simple plastic box being such a hassle.

--- End quote ---

No you totally misunderstood what I put, I never said they are honest, I said that this is how it works, take it or leave it! So you do business with someone in any other jurisdiction even a "western" one and there is a problem, what do YOU do about it? can YOU actually DO anything?
floobydust:
Sorry I didn't read that right. Here, you can go to court over say getting the moulds returned and any breach of contract. IP is somewhat protected.
A similar course of action in china looks like hell. You really have to do your homework. Snippet taken from https://harrisbricken.com/chinalawblog/contracts-in-china-enforce-it-or-go-home/

"... To pursue a claim successfully against a Chinese company, the following is usually required:

First, there must be a written contract between the parties, executed by both parties in accordance with the Chinese law requirements. It used to be common to do business in China without a contract. Much OEM manufacturing in China is done on a purchase order basis, with no underlying contract. Much service work done by foreigners for Chinese clients is based on an exchange of emails. Back in the days when China had no laws and no courts, this informal approach made some sense because there was no alternative. Today, however, to be able to bring a plausible claim against a Chinese company, the foreign plaintiff almost always must be able to show a formal relationship between the parties. Unlike in the U.S. or the EUR, Chinese courts rarely allow for proving the existence of a contract by putting together pieces evidenced by scattered POs, invoices, emails and desperate phone calls. The court will insist on a written agreement that unambiguously names the parties and provides the basis for the agreement.

Second, the contract must be enforceable in China. As a practical matter, Chinese courts incredibly rarely enforce foreign judgments and it can be quite difficult to get them to enforce a foreign arbitration award. A contract enforceable in China must meet the following basic standards:

1. The contract is governed by Chinese law. Under Chinese law, it is permissible to provide that the contract be governed by foreign law. However, providing for foreign law all but guarantees failure in a Chinese court because Chinese courts require the party to prove every relevant element of foreign law. This is a disaster for several reasons. First, proving foreign law is expensive. Second, proving foreign law leads to delay. Third, skillful defendants will dispute the application of foreign law, rendering your case and even any judgment you receive uncertain.

2. The governing language of the contract is Chinese. Under Chinese law, it is permissible to provide that the governing language of the contract is a foreign language such as English. To do so, however, nearly always leads to disaster. Chinese courts will only work with Chinese language documents. This means the contract must be translated into Chinese. The translation will not be done by the parties but rather by a court appointed translator. The translator is often not particularly skilled and the resulting translation is often simply wrong. Even when the translation is correct, the defendant will often dispute the translation, leading to delays and ultimate uncertainty in the decision. Having someone else translate your contract after you sue means that you do not even know exactly what it is on which you are suing. We are also aware of Chinese courts simply refusing to hear cases that involve contracts in a language other than Chinese.

3. The contract should be enforceable in a Chinese court with jurisdiction over the defendant. This normally means jurisdiction in a court in the district where the defendant has its principal place of business. China has excellent domestic arbitration panels with extensive experience in resolving foreign disputes. But litigation is usually a better alternative for several reasons.

First, in disputes with smaller Chinese companies, there is a concern the company will dissipate assets before a judgment can be obtained. Chinese courts can order a prejudgment writ of attachment that prevents this. In addition, a prejudgment writ will often convince a smaller Chinese company to resolve the matter quickly.

Second, the plaintiff in a dispute with a Chinese company will often want an order instructing the defendant to take some action such as ceasing to infringe IP rights, return molds or tooling, or appointing a manager or officer of a company. In other words, what would be called injunctive relief in a common law system. Chinese courts have the authority to issue such orders and an arbitration panel does not.

4. The place of litigation should be in the district where the Chinese defendant has its principle place of business. Many foreign parties will seek an agreement for jurisdiction in some neutral district such as Beijing or Shanghai. This is a mistake. First, Chinese courts will simply ignore such agreements. Second, and more important, Chinese courts are reluctant to enforce judgments from other districts and they often will ignore orders issued by Chinese courts from other districts. This means if you get a judgment in Beijing but need to enforce it in Chengdu against your Chinese counter-party, you may not be able to do so."
----------------------

I think for OP, and I've made this mistake too is the "discounted" or "no fee" development work flipping the IP situation around:

"The first disaster usually occurs when the Chinese manufacturer does not charge the foreign company anything for the product development work. In these situations, the Chinese manufacturer often will claim that any intellectual property in the developed product is its own and will generously offer to make the product on behalf of the foreign company at price, payment, quantity, quality and delivery terms chosen by the Chinese manufacturer. Our China lawyers see this all the time, especially with start-up companies involved in making products for the Internet of Things ecosystem. No matter how outrageous the pricing or other demands from the Chinese manufacturer, there is little the foreign company can do because it waited until development was finished before even considering who would end up with “its” IP."

Rest of the article is a very good read https://harrisbricken.com/chinalawblog/china-product-development-agreements/
Simon:
And again you fail to see my point which put bluntly is: when dealing with a country like china you either put up or shut up! It's not like you are not forewarned, you just have to have a 5 minute understanding of how international law works. From what you say you can only sue a chinese company in china under their laws, if you deem those unfavourable then you don't do trade. This is why people who deal with china will hire a local representative that understands the laws and will get you what you want.

Contracts are worthless if they are unenforceable in practice or the party that should loose has nothing to loose. What you do if you do not like the laws of the jurisdiction where your opponent is is to get them to agree to a contract in a place where you both agree that you are OK with that jurisdictions laws and crucially where you both hold assets!!!! it's pointless doing a deal with a company in say korea under the legal jurisdiction of alasaka if the company has no assets in alaska because the alaskan authorities have no authority over assets in korea.

If the whole thread is just about calling chinese suppliers dishonest then I may as well just lock it! this is not news. What is more important is to work out how to not get caught out rather than bitching about your own ignorance!
peter-h:
Yes; all talk of contracts is meaningless, because enforcing anything in China will cost 5 digits plus. There is no such thing as "international law".

I think the only way to play this game is to buy a lot of stock in one go, and maintain a high stock level.
peter-h:
An update:

The company subcontracted the moulding to another one. They asked us to deal with that company directly, for future business.

Then we got a string of bizzare comms, some (from them) via SMS and some via email. The moulding company won't reveal their address, and the name they use is probably fake. So I asked them to return the tool. Then more bizzare comms e.g. the employee saying it "puts her in a difficult position", and later saying they want another USD 1000 to release the tool, or a PO for 10k mouldings at the new vastly inflated price.

However, we never had a business relationship with this company. The tool was paid for via the original company, so it is their responsibility. Of course they are washing their hands of it too.

I don't really want to pay the USD 1000 because they could pocket the money and return a smashed up tool. That is another well known Chinese practice; happened to us a few times with test equipment we sent out there. I can get a new tool made for about USD 3000. In fact this would be the 3rd tool for the same moulding :)

I wonder if anyone has any experience of "Chinese extortion" practices and how they can be resolved. For example, while I very much doubt the Chinese police will be interested, it may also be that a visit from the local police will scare the hell out of a Chinese businessman.

It is possible that both firms are reading this, of course.

I am not posting their names, yet :)
Navigation
Message Index
Next page
Previous page
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...

Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod