Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Forced Tech Transfers Are on the Rise in China, European Firms Say

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 66 posts

Re: Forced Tech Transfers Are on the Rise in China, European Firms Say

#41

Post by CogitoCogito »

dv_dt wrote: post #37

Epitome of lemming syndrome: OMG we have to setup shop in China so we can produce goods more cheaply. But if we do we're forced to give up the tech. Can we just not do that? But all our competitors are going to do it. Maybe invest in another nation or continent.

If by "lemming syndrome" you mean "tragedy of the commons", you're entirely right. This is exactly why either a concerted US government push-back is needed (as is occurring now) or an acceptance of the tech transference (as occurred before).

Re: Forced Tech Transfers Are on the Rise in China, European Firms Say

#42

Post by A2017U1 »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #30
tracer4201 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is forcing a joint venture a bad deal? Isn’t that choice? You don’t have to do business in China. Some of my friends that are the most angry about this topic, will on the other hand, defend American companies who pay low wages saying no one is forcing the workers to take those low paying jobs.

The problem is that China insists they don't do forced technology transfers, and gets angry themselves when e.g. the US cuts off Huawei. If the government openly said "you can't do business in China if you don't want to give us your tech", I don't think anyone would get angry about that, but it would put them in a substantially worse market position than they currently enjoy.

But you can't do business in China without handing over your tech and partnering with locals.

Needing that translated, stamped and signed on fancy paper is irrelevant. The message is loud and clear to anyone wanting to do business.

Sovereign nations are allowed to make laws. They are under no obligation to make things easier for foreign multinationals.

Re: Forced Tech Transfers Are on the Rise in China, European Firms Say

#43

Post by acct1771 »

tracer4201 wrote: post #27
z2 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a unique problem with China (and India too in the future) is that it is so big that the consequences of transfer materialize faster and and in bigger ways. Unlike smaller developing nations, China seems to be pretty good at learning and implementing, either as a matter of policy or through the sheer size of its markets and burgeoning professional class. Siemens and Kawasaki probably didn't expect China to int…

What is it about China that allowed them to so quickly internalize that high speed rail tech so they could compete with Siemens or Kawasaki? Meanwhile, in the US, our government is on the verge of shutdown every year because we have to raise some artificial debt ceiling to keep the federal government operating. Why are the Chinese so much more efficient? Americans, even progressive Americans, often think of governmen…

They haven't had long enough to see all of the eventual downfalls of centralized, secretive governance.

Re: Forced Tech Transfers Are on the Rise in China, European Firms Say

#44

Post by dv_dt »

CogitoCogito wrote: post #41
dv_dt wrote: post #37

Epitome of lemming syndrome: OMG we have to setup shop in China so we can produce goods more cheaply. But if we do we're forced to give up the tech. Can we just not do that? But all our competitors are going to do it. Maybe invest in another nation or continent.

If by "lemming syndrome" you mean "tragedy of the commons", you're entirely right. This is exactly why either a concerted US government push-back is needed (as is occurring now) or an acceptance of the tech transference (as occurred before).

No not tragedy of the commons, it's that businesses are so focused on growing short term profits they'll enter into efforts that yield profits in the three year timeframe that are long term losers (giving up IP) in the medium to long term. It's madness.

Re: Forced Tech Transfers Are on the Rise in China, European Firms Say

#45

Post by CogitoCogito »

dv_dt wrote: post #44
CogitoCogito wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If by "lemming syndrome" you mean "tragedy of the commons", you're entirely right. This is exactly why either a concerted US government push-back is needed (as is occurring now) or an acceptance of the tech transference (as occurred before).

No not tragedy of the commons, it's that businesses are so focused on growing short term profits they'll enter into efforts that yield profits in the three year timeframe that are long term losers (giving up IP) in the medium to long term. It's madness.

> No not tragedy of the commons, it's that businesses are so focused on growing short term profits they'll enter into efforts that yield profits in the three year timeframe that are long term losers (giving up IP) in the medium to long term. It's madness.

Okay sure it's a combination of searching for short-term profits and tragedy of the commons. Individuals acting in their own self-interest against an overall greater good.

Re: Forced Tech Transfers Are on the Rise in China, European Firms Say

#46

Post by dv_dt »

CogitoCogito wrote: post #45
dv_dt wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No not tragedy of the commons, it's that businesses are so focused on growing short term profits they'll enter into efforts that yield profits in the three year timeframe that are long term losers (giving up IP) in the medium to long term. It's madness.

> No not tragedy of the commons, it's that businesses are so focused on growing short term profits they'll enter into efforts that yield profits in the three year timeframe that are long term losers (giving up IP) in the medium to long term. It's madness. Okay sure it's a combination of searching for short-term profits and tragedy of the commons. Individuals acting in their own self-interest against an overall greate…

IMHO, government has little real power to pragmatically curtail this as a formal trade issue. If it's legally not allowed, it's not like employees in China can't walk away with the tech anyway. The question is where you want to build your technology base and where short term greed drives you to build.

Private IP of companies isn't any sort of public commons. By deciding to build stuff in China, they've already left the only arguable commons part of that - the common labor knowledge base that forms naturally where you put your actual build operations.

Re: Forced Tech Transfers Are on the Rise in China, European Firms Say

#47

Post by CogitoCogito »

dv_dt wrote: post #46
CogitoCogito wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No not tragedy of the commons, it's that businesses are so focused on growing short term profits they'll enter into efforts that yield profits in the three year timeframe that are long term losers (giving up IP) in the medium to long term. It's madness. Okay sure it's a combination of searching for short-term profits and tragedy of the commons. Individuals acting in their own self-interest against an overall greate…

IMHO, government has little real power to pragmatically curtail this as a formal trade issue. If it's legally not allowed, it's not like employees in China can't walk away with the tech anyway. The question is where you want to build your technology base and where short term greed drives you to build. Private IP of companies isn't any sort of public commons. By deciding to build stuff in China, they've already left t…

Well the US could for example put up trade barriers that are costly enough for China to change. Of course it might not work due to lack of US political will, or strong Chinese political will, or any number of reasons, but it's not like nothing is possible. I'm not necessarily saying this is a good idea, but it's not like this is some magically impossible problem to solve.

Re: Forced Tech Transfers Are on the Rise in China, European Firms Say

#48

Post by westiseast »

perfunctory wrote: post #5

Framing detector is on. I have an issue with the word "forced". Nobody is forcing you with a gun to your head. Don't want to be "forced" - don't go do business in China.

That’s a disingenuous argument.

eg. in 2019, nobody is ‘forced’ to give their data to Google/Apple/Facebook, but actually avoiding those companies entirely is extremely difficult/nigh impossible.

Not engaging with China as a market or producer is practically impossible for many companies. When the choice is (a) give up your business by handing your IP over to Chinese competitors or (b) give up your business by losing access to critical supply chain/logistics, then that can be correctly characterised as ‘being forced’.

Re: Forced Tech Transfers Are on the Rise in China, European Firms Say

#49

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

A2017U1 wrote: post #42
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that China insists they don't do forced technology transfers, and gets angry themselves when e.g. the US cuts off Huawei. If the government openly said "you can't do business in China if you don't want to give us your tech", I don't think anyone would get angry about that, but it would put them in a substantially worse market position than they currently enjoy.

But you can't do business in China without handing over your tech and partnering with locals. Needing that translated, stamped and signed on fancy paper is irrelevant. The message is loud and clear to anyone wanting to do business. Sovereign nations are allowed to make laws. They are under no obligation to make things easier for foreign multinationals.

Having things stamped and signed on fancy paper is absolutely relevant. As the article describes, not having that fancy paper enables the government to brazenly lie, saying forced tech transfers are being stopped when they're actually being ramped up.

Re: Forced Tech Transfers Are on the Rise in China, European Firms Say

#50

Post by dv_dt »

tracer4201 wrote: post #27
z2 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a unique problem with China (and India too in the future) is that it is so big that the consequences of transfer materialize faster and and in bigger ways. Unlike smaller developing nations, China seems to be pretty good at learning and implementing, either as a matter of policy or through the sheer size of its markets and burgeoning professional class. Siemens and Kawasaki probably didn't expect China to int…

What is it about China that allowed them to so quickly internalize that high speed rail tech so they could compete with Siemens or Kawasaki? Meanwhile, in the US, our government is on the verge of shutdown every year because we have to raise some artificial debt ceiling to keep the federal government operating. Why are the Chinese so much more efficient? Americans, even progressive Americans, often think of governmen…

I think that greed is easier to manage when expanding into underserved & undercapitalized markets - in that environment most capital increase becomes an easily spread general improvement in life quality.

When trying to balance inequality in well-capitalized, mature markets, you fundamentally have to trade one set of ownership against another on a much more frequent basis. To replace one set of capital investments with another (even when the new investments are an improvement), requires displacement of the old owners and old industry; see fossil fuels and climate crisis as a major example. Government becomes a battleground between the capital interests and is often where progress is neutralized.

Post reply on HN