Counterfeit Air Bag Racket Blows Up

Well, that explains it by crazyjj · 2012-10-10 06:35 · Score: 4, Funny

I was wondering why my new airbag looked so much like beach ball attached to a can of Fix-a-Flat.

--
What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?

Re:Well, that explains it by Jeng · 2012-10-10 06:55 · Score: 5, Insightful

Considering this device performs a controlled explosion right in front of your face I would rather like my airbag to have had some form of assurance that their manufacturing techniques are sound and that they go though a rigorous QA process.

--
Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
Re:Well, that explains it by thelexx · 2012-10-10 07:02 · Score: 2, Insightful

Really? Sounds like a bit more than that to me:
"While NHTSA says it has no reports of injuries or deaths linked to a counterfeit device, in its testing the counterfeit bags had "consistent malfunctioning," ranging from not deploying on impact to throwing metal shards."
Feel free to install them in your car however and re-sell the genuine ones for a bit of quick cash.

--
"Gold still represents the ultimate form of payment in the world." - Alan Greenspan, 1999
Re:Well, that explains it by CubicleZombie · 2012-10-10 07:08 · Score: 5, Informative

Here's a video of a counterfeit airbag in action. The first one just didn't work. The second one grenaded in the dummy's face. Both defective and dangerous.

--
:wq
Re:Well, that explains it by Lunix+Nutcase · 2012-10-10 07:15 · Score: 1

That's funny since TFS says:

Safety officials will warn millions of Americans that the air bags in over 100 vehicle models could be dangerous counterfeits, telling them to have their cars and trucks inspected as soon as possible.
Maybe you need to read all of the summary next time?
Re:Well, that explains it by nedlohs · 2012-10-10 07:16 · Score: 1

So RTFA you lazy fuck, "NHTSA testing has shown some of the counterfeit bags don't inflate or fail to inflate properly, they said. In at least one case, a counterfeit bag fired shards of plastic and other projectiles on impact, they said."
Re:Well, that explains it by supervillainsf · 2012-10-10 07:20 · Score: 5, Funny

I don't RTFA, but there's not a single thing in TFS saying the "counterfeits" are defective or dangerous. Indeed, no one's been hurt. Sounds like it's just a case of trademark infringement, a practice that usually saves the consumer money.
Let me translate your post:

"I got really poor marks in reading comprehension and am way too lazy to actually click on a link and spend a whole 2 minutes of my life reading something that isn't distilled down to LCD levels, but I really felt the need to post something that demonstrates my bias"

Thank you for posting I am a better person for reading your intelligent comment.
Re:Well, that explains it by Quiet_Desperation · 2012-10-10 07:33 · Score: 1

way too lazy to actually click on a link and spend a whole 2 minutes of my life reading something

This is the site where I recently got flamed for suggesting that taking five *seconds* to pick out clothes in the morning isn't something to obsess about.
Re:Well, that explains it by SharpFang · 2012-10-10 07:34 · Score: 1

Well then, why doesn't the article suggest performing such tests and checks, but immediately jumps to conclusion that they are all bad? Maybe they should just get certified and have the offending logos removed instead?

--
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
Re:Well, that explains it by rhsanborn · 2012-10-10 07:44 · Score: 1

Look at the little fiery spirals... did they use leftover fireworks as the explosive?
Re:Well, that explains it by MightyYar · 2012-10-10 07:55 · Score: 1

Weren't the examples in that story big public figures? I'm thinking that a few more eyeballs might be on their wardrobes than on the typical Slashdot workin' stiff.

--
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Re:Well, that explains it by geoskd · 2012-10-10 07:59 · Score: 4, Informative

Well then, why doesn't the article suggest performing such tests and checks, but immediately jumps to conclusion that they are all bad? Maybe they should just get certified and have the offending logos removed instead?
Because the offending air bags were just dummy mock ups. No incendiary, no detonator, just a chunk of plastic with the logo on it. We're not talking about pirate copies, we're talking outright fraud...
-=Geoskd

--
I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
Re:Well, that explains it by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 08:25 · Score: 0

The first fucking line of the summary:

...which fail to inflate properly or don't inflate at all.
Re:Well, that explains it by Artifakt · 2012-10-10 09:34 · Score: 1

What part of "which fail to inflate properly or don't inflate at all. from the summary sounds like it isn't saying they are defective or dangerous?
You didn't read the article. You didn't read the summary. Your post did nothing but waste space.

--
Who is John Cabal?
Re:Well, that explains it by nitehawk214 · 2012-10-10 09:39 · Score: 1

The second failure was fairly spectacular. You can also easily see what brand of car they were using.

--
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
Re:Well, that explains it by tragedy · 2012-10-10 11:19 · Score: 1

Yes, the article is pretty careful not to say anything at all about the physical, mechanical or electronic aspects of the counterfeits, just that they're re-manufactured from core parts from deployed airbags.
On the other hand, the only legitimate reason for the existence of trademarks is consumer protection. Protected trademarks ensure that, when a customer buys a product, they know who actually made it and can presumably count on that companies procedures, materials, quality control, etc. being used in the manufacture of the product. So, "counterfeit" products are bad because they pull a fast one on the consumer and they don't get what they expect. Of course, the way most companies commoditize their trademarks flies in the face of this. When companies will simply swap out the underlying internals of a product willy nilly and slap on the same outer casing and trademarked logo, it sort of defeats the purpose. Ditto for companies who will simply rent out their trademarks to anyone as long as they can pay.
Cars, and presumably car safety parts are a pretty safety-critical industry, however. If car parts are being distributed with the OEM's logo added to them (if they're sold specifically as "remanufactured" and have the logo from the original core part, I consider that another story), then it implies that the product has been through that companies safety testing and produced to the same standards as all its original parts. In that respect, that kind of counterfeiting can harm the consumer (in a very literal way).
On yet another hand, car safety systems are presumably a regulated industry, with certain safety and certification requirements. That being the case, it's a bit disturbing that the big deal being made about this is "counterfeiting" rather than distributing uncertified and untested parts. Since nothing about this is mentioned, does that mean that it's just poor or biased reporting, or does it mean that no sort of safety testing or certification are actually required for these parts, or does it mean that these parts are actually fully tested and certified, but are just having an OEM logo stamped on them when they aren't OEM?
Re:Well, that explains it by tragedy · 2012-10-10 11:24 · Score: 3, Informative

I didn't actually see that anywhere in the article. It did say that some fired shards of plastic or failed to inflate fully during testing. They don't say how well they actually compare to other airbags which very well may experience the same kinds of problems in some tests.
Re:Well, that explains it by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2012-10-10 11:37 · Score: 2

Many counterfeits are manufactured on the same assembly lines that produce the real stuff. These suppliers are under strict contract that they are not allowed to do that, but they sometimes do anyway, often using cheaper materials. So the frauds look identical because they basically are, but for the cheaper, and thus more dangerous, materials.

--
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Re:Well, that explains it by Trogre · 2012-10-10 13:14 · Score: 1

Maybe if genuine airbags weren't so ludicrously expensive there wouldn't be such a market for counterfeit ones...
There's some price-fixing worth looking into.

--
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
Re:Well, that explains it by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 14:48 · Score: 0

The second failure was fairly spectacular. You can also easily see what brand of car they were using.
Because of the sign they hung on the side of it?
(yes, i saw the badge fly off the steering wheel too...)
Re:Well, that explains it by Rich0 · 2012-10-10 15:10 · Score: 1

I think the issue that for most parts there is competition with aftermarket parts, but with airbags there isn't (or at least there isn't supposed to be). Thus no price pressure.
Obviously quality standards for an explosive based on a highly toxic powder also have to be pretty high. That has to cost something as well. Then there is all the liability. But, I think lack of competition is the main culprit.
I don't get why the designs aren't just standardized - dictate a few seat/wheel geometries and then have standard bags to go with them. Then anybody could make them.
Re:Well, that explains it by Ellis+D.+Tripp · 2012-10-10 15:17 · Score: 1

Perhaps the cost of airbags has to do with them being safety-critical pyrotechnic devices that need to function perfectly within millisecond tolerances when needed, after perhaps a decade or more of sitting in your car, enduring summer heat and winter cold.
They cannot be 100% functionally tested, and therefore need to rely on severe quality assurance testing during manufacture and lot testing / traceability more akin to aerospace components than auto parts.
They contain chemicals that are HIGHLY toxic, and require special handling precautions and worker safeguards during manufacture.
And if one ever fails to function properly, it invites an expensive lawsuit against the component manufacturer and the carmaker. The product liability coverage alone for explosive devices that are used in direct proximity to people must be quite expensive, no?

--
Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
Re:Well, that explains it by drkstr1 · 2012-10-10 17:33 · Score: 1

I don't RTFA, but there's not a single thing in TFS saying the "counterfeits" are defective or dangerous. Indeed, no one's been hurt. Sounds like it's just a case of trademark infringement, a practice that usually saves the consumer money.
My thoughts exactly. To bad you got a -1 for them. Oh, and I did RTFA, and you were right. The complaint here is that some IP was violated. Fuck those guys, and fuck their "name brand" airbags (which are probably made in china anyways).

--
Fanboy Status: Apache Flex, C#, Eclipse, KDE, Pirate Party, Ron Paul, Slackware, Windows 7
Re:Well, that explains it by swalve · 2012-10-10 22:58 · Score: 1

Stuff made on the same assembly line isn't exactly counterfeiting, is it? Items like that are more like black market or dark grey market goods. Maybe my own definition of counterfeit is more narrow than other people's. I always thought counterfeit goods were goods that are not made by the same people (authorized or not) and sold as the real thing in the grey or white market.
Re:Well, that explains it by swalve · 2012-10-10 23:09 · Score: 1

Indeed. When you think about it, it becomes hard to understand how they make them so cheaply. My car has like 10 airbags, and [a cheaper version of] the car can be had for $15,000, brand new.

The only place where price might get messed with is the middlemen/insurance connection. Even though the auto manufacturer sets the wholesale price of the thing, the retail price will float all over the place because the end consumer isn't seeing it or paying for it.
Re:Well, that explains it by swalve · 2012-10-10 23:11 · Score: 1

Don't forget the subtext of "I'm Taxed Enough Already, Rush Limbaugh is a genius, I got footprints in the sand next to me, tell me what to think, Jesus!"
Re:Well, that explains it by swalve · 2012-10-10 23:22 · Score: 2, Funny

That sounds suspiciously like onerous Obama regulations on business that are destroying America, to me. These proud businessmen are charging $1000 for a part packed in newspaper in a box that has "xmass Gnome figure" crossed out and "A1R8AG for TOYOTACAMERY" written on the side that they bought for $75 from some guy in a van. They are wealth creators! Leave 'em alone, ya commie. Also, caveat emptor, you should have known better. When the "airbag" filled with depleted uranium kills your family, don't try suing anyone either, or else you'd be a lazy goldbrick, looking to profit off of the poor businessman who's just trying to feed his family and his beleaguered insurance company.
Re:Well, that explains it by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-11 01:29 · Score: 0

What part of "fail to inflate properly or don't inflate at all." did you fail to understand, Mr Retard?
Re:Well, that explains it by Quiet_Desperation · 2012-10-11 07:35 · Score: 1

Well, not quite. I was responding to "Slashdot workin' stiffs" who claimed to do the same thing.
Even then, the world will not tumble into the Sun if Obama pauses two seconds to pick his own tie.
Anyone else who is sitting there fretting over the time spent on every day little nothings is suffering from some syndrome on some mental health spectrum. They always come up with the idea that all those moments added together could be spent sequentially somewhere else doing something more important. It's a fallacy.

Of *course* they came from China by JDG1980 · 2012-10-10 06:39 · Score: 0

government investigators believe many of the bags come from China

No shit.

Re:Of *course* they came from China by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 06:42 · Score: 1

Even the authentic ones...
Re:Of *course* they came from China by war4peace · 2012-10-10 06:49 · Score: 1

Welcome to the World of Fakes.

--
...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
Re:Of *course* they came from China by magarity · 2012-10-10 06:50 · Score: 2, Insightful

I'm a little suprised even the legit ones work properly. Manufacturers of anything in China are the same mindset of those who passed off industrial chemicals as baby milk formula. Speaking of which, watch out for packaged food in the supermarkets these days - a lot of it says 'Made in China' and it's just a matter of time before a major ingredients scandal hits.
Re:Of *course* they came from China by Jeng · 2012-10-10 06:57 · Score: 1

government investigators believe many of the bags come from China
No shit.

There are other sources for crap besides China.
China makes a lot of crap, but not all of the crap.

--
Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
Re:Of *course* they came from China by robot5x · 2012-10-10 07:02 · Score: 1

serious question -

are there any news stories from China which don't involve how they're either spying on us or trying to kill us with counterfeit products?

I'd genuinely like to know how much of this news is anti-china propaganda, or whether things really are that fucked up over there.

--
Hej! Nasi tu byli!
Re:Of *course* they came from China by Jeng · 2012-10-10 07:08 · Score: 1

There are a few, but for the most part though things are that fucked up.
Here is a good story about China.
http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/intelligent-energy/us-partners-with-china-on-new-nuclear/17037

--
Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
Re:Of *course* they came from China by fustakrakich · 2012-10-10 07:18 · Score: 4, Informative

...it's just a matter of time before a major ingredients scandal hits.
Waddya mean 'before'?

--
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Re:Of *course* they came from China by CosaNostra+Pizza+Inc · 2012-10-10 07:32 · Score: 2, Insightful

True, but doesn't most of the crap bought in the U.S. come from China?
Re:Of *course* they came from China by SuperMooCow · 2012-10-10 07:37 · Score: 2

Dollar stores also have a lot of food items these days, especially since they now also have $2 and $3 items.
One thing I've noticed is that a lot of items now say "Made in PRC" instead of "Made in China".
The good thing is, I also see a lot of items made in Italy, Germany, Netherlands, etc. We even also have items made in Canada and the USA!
Re:Of *course* they came from China by stephanruby · 2012-10-10 07:39 · Score: 3, Informative

Speaking of which, watch out for packaged food in the supermarkets these days - a lot of it says 'Made in China' and it's just a matter of time before a major ingredients scandal hits.
Too late: Study: Most Honey Is Just Fake, Pollenless Goo
But I wouldn't blame the Chinese only. Our own Federal government is the one to blame. As long as the fake cheaper substitutes do not kill us, our own government won't intervene.
Vote with your feet people. Learn which stores carry fake honey. You never know what else they might be carrying that's fake. My local Safeway for instance still carries fake honey (even after the news came out), but my local Trader Joes' doesn't (it apparently never did).
Re:Of *course* they came from China by Jeng · 2012-10-10 07:40 · Score: 1

True, but doesn't most of the crap bought in the U.S. come from China?

And India and Southeast Asia and Eastern Europe and even The United States of America.

--
Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
Re:Of *course* they came from China by Dishevel · 2012-10-10 07:43 · Score: 1

There are other sources for crap besides China.
China makes a lot of crap, but not all of the crap.
Don't forget union workers you insensitive clod.

--
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
Re:Of *course* they came from China by alen · 2012-10-10 07:46 · Score: 1

the legit stuff is audited during manufacture. all the US based brand owners spend lots of money to audit everything they make to make sure its up to spec.
sometimes i wonder why not make it in the US and worry less about auditing your factories
Re:Of *course* they came from China by Rockoon · 2012-10-10 07:56 · Score: 1

There are other sources for crap besides China.
China broke 100 million factory workers in 2008. Thats 4 years ago. Only 11 countries had more citizens in total than china had factory workers at that time.

If you pick a container ship at random from all the oceans, the odds are very good that its full of stuff made in China.

I'm going with Bayes on this one.. the priori probability that an item selected at random is made in China is quite high. That we then we learn that its a counterfeit.. that makes it almost a certainty. Thats exactly what a spam filter would say.. and those are damn good these days.

--
"His name was James Damore."
Re:Of *course* they came from China by mrbene · 2012-10-10 07:57 · Score: 1

I, too, am verily surprised that these newfangled iPhone 5 thingamabobs work properly.
Re:Of *course* they came from China by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 08:11 · Score: 0

Yes, there certainly are. They tend to be about how workers at Foxconn are treated or about how they go on strike and riot because we don't want blemishes on our iDoohickeys.
Re:Of *course* they came from China by Zeio · 2012-10-10 08:34 · Score: 4, Informative

China is the most dangerous country in the world today. And the information about how horrible the Chinese, despite them getting MUCH worse given the economic situation, the information flow has been nearly shut down since 2007 timeframe. There were big 60 minutes type exposes in 2007 but since then the Police State has seen that information regarding our forced consumption of Chinese Walmart Plastic with Federal Reserve Notes remains in place.
China tires bad:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118278927863547228.html
The organizing committee of Beijingâ(TM)s Olympic games has promised to investigate charges that official merchandise is being manufactured using child labor.
The PRC Chinese poison dog food:
http://www.themoneytimes.com/articles/20070523/chinese_protein_export_scandal-id-104033.html
The PRC Chinese poison toothpaste:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/02/us/02toothpaste.html?ex=1181620800&en=d26dab8b2bd85303&ei=5070
The PRC Chinese poison Children's Toys:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070614/thomas_recall_070614/20070614?hub=CTVNewsAt11
http://blogs.eastbayexpress.com/92510/2007/06/thomas_why_hath_thou_forsaken.php
Chinese Seafood Detained for Safety
http://www.topix.com/forum/food/TFSGN6836LFM2QFV7
Melamine put into milk formula, dog food, etc.
http://www.treehugger.com/green-food/got-melamine-53000-chinese-children-did-in-their-milk.html
- Cow milk so inundated with antibiotics you can not make Yogurt from it.
- Pigs force-fed waste water.
- Lard made from separating fats from sewage.
Made in China: tainted food, fake drugs and dodgy paint
http://www.guardian.co.uk/china/story/0,,2118920,00.html
China Jails 2 Protestant Church Leaders
http://www.nysun.com/foreign/china-jails-two-protestant-leaders/58150/
The PRC Chinese government has murdered countless people:
"DEATH BY GOVERNMENT: GENOCIDE AND MASS MURDER"
http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE1.HTM
http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/COM.TAB1.GIF
http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/COM.FIG1.GIF
Given modern industrial process and productivity, I don't even see how using Chinese slave labor saves that much in the face of having to crate up and ship the goods from china to consuming markets.
The bean counters saved maybe 10% at best making product, and now with the price of shipping goods going up due to petrol, they are probably paying more to have it made in China.
The only real reason it may never come back to the US is a host of states (NY, CA) and The Fedzilla / US government that have a long list of anti-business laws making a return to the US difficult.
You want Made in the USA? Tell state and federal congress to stop doing everything to drive up the cost of business compared to China and India (the only two competitors that matter); stop buying Chinese crap where possible.
Slave Labor rented at a PREMIUM with low quality results is still apparently cheaper than coming back her

--
Legalize the constitution. Think for yourself question authority.
Re:Of *course* they came from China by mcmonkey · 2012-10-10 08:42 · Score: 1

Vote with your feet people.
Feet? What are you doing with that honey?
Re:Of *course* they came from China by SternisheFan · 2012-10-10 09:00 · Score: 1

When I was a young man, we didn'have these new-fangled self-inflating airbag thingys. We had to blow up our airbags "manually"....., and we LIKED IT!!
Re:Of *course* they came from China by arth1 · 2012-10-10 09:34 · Score: 1

China broke 100 million factory workers in 2008.
Any which way you read it...
Re:Of *course* they came from China by nitehawk214 · 2012-10-10 09:42 · Score: 1

When I was a young man, we didn'have these new-fangled self-inflating airbag thingys. We had to blow up our airbags "manually"....., and we LIKED IT!!
I don't think air bags are pilot and flight attendant shaped.

--
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
Re:Of *course* they came from China by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 09:47 · Score: 0

Slave Labor rented at a PREMIUM with low quality results is still apparently cheaper than coming back here and paying tons of taxes, be subjected to over regulation and be threatened with union formation.
So clarify. Are you against these practices or in favor of importing them and instituting them in Alabama and Ohio?
Re:Of *course* they came from China by retchdog · 2012-10-10 10:03 · Score: 1

it's more efficient this way. oh, yes, occasionally there's a problem with legal liability, but once we can push through radical tort reform and get rid of meddlesome agencies like NHTSA, that problem will be solved.

--
"They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
Re:Of *course* they came from China by drinkypoo · 2012-10-10 10:14 · Score: 1

My local safeway carries some of the best prepackaged honey in the country, which is only available more or less near the bay area. I buy it in cans, whenever it is on sale. I don't care if they also sell shitty honey, and I'm sure they do...

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:Of *course* they came from China by cvtan · 2012-10-10 11:34 · Score: 1

Luxury! You were lucky...

--
Sorry, but gray text on gray background is making my eyes bleed.
Re:Of *course* they came from China by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2012-10-10 11:42 · Score: 2

That honey article is misleading -- there's nothing fake about ultra-filtered, pollenless honey. The issue was this pollenless honey was ultrafiltered so they couldn't trace the pollen back to the country of origin, China in this case.
"Nutritional" benefit of pollen in honey that you're lacking? Puh-fucking-leeze. Issues of other kinds of contamination are valid, of course, but that can occur with "normal" pollen-a-liscious honey, too.

--
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Re:Of *course* they came from China by SternisheFan · 2012-10-10 12:35 · Score: 1

I don't think air bags are pilot and flight attendant shaped.
Heh :)
Well, if your local porn shop doesn't stock 'em, there are always 'discreet' shops on-line....
Re:Of *course* they came from China by stephanruby · 2012-10-10 12:48 · Score: 2

That honey article is misleading -- there's nothing fake about ultra-filtered, pollenless honey.
That's correct. Ultra-filtered honey isn't proof-positive that it's fake.
However...

[...]
Food safety investigators from the European Union barred all shipments of honey from India because of the presence of lead and illegal animal antibiotics. Further, they found an even larger amount of honey apparently had been concocted without the help of bees, made from artificial sweeteners and then extensively filtered to remove any proof of contaminants or adulteration or indications of precisely where the honey actually originated.
An examination of international and government shipping tallies, customs documents and interviews with some of North America’s top honey importers and brokers documented the rampant honey laundering and that a record amount of the Chinese honey was being purchased by major U.S. packers.
Food Safety News contacted Suebee Co-Op, the nation’s oldest and largest honey packer and seller, for a response to these allegations and to learn where it gets its honey. The co-op did not respond to repeated calls and emails for comment. Calls and emails to other major honey sellers also were unreturned.
EU Won’t Accept Honey from India
Much of this questionable honey was officially banned beginning June 2010 by the 27 countries of the European Union and others. But on this side of the ocean, the FDA checks few of the thousands of shipments arriving through 22 American ports each year.
According to FDA data, between January and June, just 24 honey shipments were stopped from entering the country. The agency declined to say how many loads are inspected and by whom.
However, during that same period, the U.S. Department of Agriculture reported that almost 43 million pounds of honey entered the U.S. Of that, the Department of Commerce said 37.7 million pounds came from India, the same honey that is banned in the EU because it contained animal medicine and lead and lacked the proper paperwork to prove it didn’t come from China.
“There are still millions of pounds of transshipped Chinese honey coming in the U.S. and it’s all coming now from India and Vietnam and everybody in the industry knows that,” said Elise Gagnon, president of Odem International, a worldwide trading house that specializes in bulk raw honey.
The FDA says it has regulations prohibiting foods banned in other countries from entering the U.S. However, the agency said last month that it “would not know about honey that has been banned from other countries ”
Adee called the FDA’s response “absurd.” He said the European ban against Indian honey is far from a secret.
“Why are we the dumping ground of the world for something that’s banned in all these other countries?” asked Adee, who, with 80,000 bee colonies in five states, is the country’s largest honey producer.
“We’re supposed to have the world’s safest food supply but we’re letting in boatloads of this adulterated honey that all these other countries know is contaminated and FDA does nothing.”
[...]
[Source]
And please note that for the EU, a ban against "Indian honey" is a ban against "Chinese honey", because Chinese Honey was being re-routed through India and then the UK to take advantage of their commonwealth connection so that it could get into the EU in the first place without paying huge tariffs.
And again, this is only circumstantial evidence, not definitive proof, but here is a video documentary on the start of mass disappearance of bees in China. http://w
Re:Of *course* they came from China by rueger · 2012-10-10 14:27 · Score: 1

You want Made in the USA? Tell state and federal congress to stop doing everything to drive up the cost of business compared to China and India

Say what? The problem is not, and never has been government "doing everything to drive up the cost of business," it's that the Chinese government has little or no safety, environmental, or labour protections. The regulatory cost of doing business in North America has likely been flat, or even has fallen somewhat in thirty years.

Chasing the downward spiral of Chinese unregulated, poisonous, dangerous, human rights abusing industry won't bring manufacturing back here.

--
Three Squirrels
Re:Of *course* they came from China by hairyfish · 2012-10-10 20:57 · Score: 1

How does this get modded Informative? Your post in summary is this: China has really really bad standards. The govt should reduce regulation in the US to China-standards to make us competitive. Having standards costs money. You can choose to have standards or save money, you can't have both.
Re:Of *course* they came from China by swalve · 2012-10-10 23:28 · Score: 1

Same thing with olive oils. It is nearly impossible to get good oil in any stores, because certain European countries cannot be trusted to oversee their oil production. The fact is, the vast majority of humanity is out to make a quick buck and doesn't really give a shit about anything else.
Re:Of *course* they came from China by fustakrakich · 2012-10-11 09:51 · Score: 1

The issue was this pollenless honey was ultrafiltered so they couldn't trace the pollen back to the country of origin, China in this case.
Hmm, I always thought they filtered out the pollen to sell off as some ridiculous dietary supplement at a premium price.

--
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”

Won't be the last by Ogive17 · 2012-10-10 06:42 · Score: 5, Informative

I'm in the OE service part industry. We've been dealing with counterfeit parts from China for the past decade, one of the reasons why less companies are allowing any assembly to occur there. The Chinese subsidiary companies will even cheat their own US/Japan mother company....

I saw video comparing the counterfeit to the OE airbags. If the counterfeit bag even deployed, it was very delayed and rarely had enough pressure to actually prevent serious injury.

--
"Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."

Re:Won't be the last by Dupple · 2012-10-10 06:48 · Score: 5, Informative

It's not just car parts. It's happening in the aircraft industry and else where. There's also the issue of refurbished parts being sold as new...
http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=67ee8eb6-54ae-403c-bcd5-3c76b6f95506

--
Watch those corners
Re:Won't be the last by Jeng · 2012-10-10 07:02 · Score: 0

I saw video comparing the counterfeit to the OE airbags. If the counterfeit bag even deployed, it was very delayed and rarely had enough pressure to actually prevent serious injury.

So is that better than it blowing up too much and bursting? Cause that is what would worry me.

--
Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
Re:Won't be the last by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 07:42 · Score: 0

WAIT WAIT WAIT. You're telling me that a company with no oversight in a country known for corruption, with NO motive but profit CAN'T be trusted? WAHT???
Re:Won't be the last by Rob+Riggs · 2012-10-10 07:50 · Score: 1

WAIT WAIT WAIT. You're telling me that a company with no oversight in a country known for corruption, with NO motive but profit CAN'T be trusted? WAHT???
I thought we were talking about China here. Let's leave Wall Street out of this, OK?

--
the growth in cynicism and rebellion has not been without cause
Re:Won't be the last by tlhIngan · 2012-10-10 07:55 · Score: 3, Interesting

It's not just car parts. It's happening in the aircraft industry and else where. There's also the issue of refurbished parts being sold as new...
Aviation is well known since the big busts in the 80s orcehstrated by fake FAA part tags and such. It was so bad it even got onto the presidential airplane (Air Force One, when he's on board).
The FAA went around a busted a bunch of dealers of counterfeit parts because it was such a huge problem that practically every commercial jet had at least one counterfeit. Even worse, they were documented as real so no one really knew (the counterfeiters were the ones profiting - the airlines and everyone else didn't know they were buying counterfeit parts).
When you consider a screw that costs 10 cents at Home Depot will probably cost $4-10 for aviation, the urge to counterfeit is very real. Even parts that are worn out or expired would get new coats of paint and resold as new.
Of course, if there's anything to show for it, is to show really how capitalistic the Chinese are - if there's a way to make a buck (scamming or otherwise), they'll do it. We've seen it happen through the many recalls - lead in toys and paint, melamine in milk (watered down - but melamine added to boost protein so hide watering down), etc. If there's a way to cut a corner, they'll find it.
Re:Won't be the last by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 08:40 · Score: 0

> It's not just car parts. It's happening in the aircraft industry and else where.
They'd even sell fake milk to babies, causing starvation and death.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Chinese_milk_scandal
No news about selling their own Grandmothers to the Soylent Corp., but I'm sure it has happened.
Re:Won't be the last by X0563511 · 2012-10-10 09:30 · Score: 0

If they got that 20 cent genuine screw's sale price down to, I don't know, $1 or even lower, then the urge to fake it with a 10 cent screw is suddenly much less attractive...
Not that it isn't a huge problem anyway, but still. When you overprice shit like that you invite this kind of thing.

--
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
Re:Won't be the last by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 10:31 · Score: 0

While it's true that some Aviation Parts are way over priced. Especially, Bell helicopter parts for discontinued models, hey if we make it chepper to buy/lease a new one then we can sell new ones, right??? There are many parts where going from to titanium to say aluminum would make the part much cheap but completely unsafe yet they would pass a cursory inspection. AN threads are 40% stronger due to the way the bottom of the thread is formed though still compatible with convectional threads. This extra strong thread is much harder to machine then a conventional thread but it's also difficult to detect the difference on the threads by observation on especially smaller sized fasteners and has lead to aircraft failure with subsequent deaths. Where not even getting into things like inconel bolts and the like which are quite expensive with no cheaper substitutes possible for the same bolt size yet a steel non graded bolt will likely thread right in at a fractionation of the cost. The hardest cost though, for a buyer to factor in, are safety tests and production quality control??? I have no way of knowing how much those cost for a bolt for which only a couple hundred a year will be consumed.
Re:Won't be the last by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2012-10-10 11:44 · Score: 1

Aircraft parts are where the "cheaper materials illegally run off on the same assembly line as real parts" issue becomes critical.

--
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Re:Won't be the last by swalve · 2012-10-10 23:39 · Score: 1

Please stop equating capitalism with cheating. They are not the same thing. Cheating and greed are human failings that happen with any economic system.

Jiffy pop air bag by GoodNewsJimDotCom · 2012-10-10 06:44 · Score: 1

The counterfeits have some surprising benefits, for example, you can have a snack while you wait for police with the Jiffy Pop air bag.

--
God spoke to me

China by Sparticus789 · 2012-10-10 06:46 · Score: 3, Insightful

China - The first economy based of stealing other people's ideas and manufacturing it for less.

--
sudo make me a sandwich

Re:China by w_dragon · 2012-10-10 06:59 · Score: 4, Insightful

Since Japan, you mean? And Germany before that? It's a pretty well-established way of getting to an industrialized economy. The only question is if they will be able to make the leap from cheap imitation crap to cheap imitation quality.
Re:China by Jeng · 2012-10-10 07:09 · Score: 1

Those who do not learn history have no fucking clue what is going on.

--
Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
Re:China by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 07:13 · Score: 0

Actually, Swiss watches got their start as low-cost knock-offs of originals made in Philadelphia.
Re:China by thelexx · 2012-10-10 07:15 · Score: 1

On the whole, I would say no.
Building a reputation for quality is hard and restrictive. It restricts your ability to be lazy and make short term cash by ripping people off.
China can make high quality things right now. They just choose not to.
And though I feel it is crucial, I will leave the cultural differences between Germany/Japan and China unexplored so as not to incite a riot.

--
"Gold still represents the ultimate form of payment in the world." - Alan Greenspan, 1999
Re:China by WilliamGeorge · 2012-10-10 07:17 · Score: 1

Or, often times, not really manufacturing it at all? I would hardly call an airbag that fails to deploy a valid copy.

--
William George
Re:China by quintus_horatius · 2012-10-10 07:20 · Score: 4, Informative

Lets not forget the United States itself, which used to be a capital of intellectual piracy and cheap knock-offs in the 18th and 19th centuries.
Re:China by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 07:37 · Score: 0

They do actually make some insanely high-quality items in very strange areas. One of the nicer cameras I own (I'm a collector) is a Chamonix 045N-1; the tolerances and finish are at least the equal of my Sinars.
Re:China by SuperMooCow · 2012-10-10 07:40 · Score: 1

Did you come up with that one yourself? It sounds really smart, I bet it will become a classic!
Re:China by Andy+Prough · 2012-10-10 07:51 · Score: 1

Yeah - cause no other country EVER thought of THAT before!!

China - The first economy based of stealing other people's ideas and manufacturing it for less.
Re:China by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 07:59 · Score: 0

economy based of stealing other people's ideas:
1. USA
2. Japan
3. Korea
Re:China by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 08:00 · Score: 0

China can make high quality things right now. They just choose not to.
Wrong, you choose not to pay them for making high quality things. It just depends on the price you are willing to pay. When you go to a chinese contract manufacturer to build 1,000,000 shiny objects you negotiate desired quality against price with them. When you accept 20% death-on-arrivel you pay next to nothing. You want 100% tested, 24h burn-in and 10 years life-expectancy? They will build it happily, but for a price that you also could build it in the US. Best example is Foxconn, for Apple they deliver high quality and for other customers they deliver lower quality.
Re:China by mrbene · 2012-10-10 08:00 · Score: 1

China can make high quality things right now. They just choose not to.
Right. Is that the rationale behind the scratches on the iPhone 5? Or does that not count as a quality thing?
Re:China by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 08:00 · Score: 0

I've read this claim a lot on Slashdot. Do you happen to have any sources I can read? Much of American innovation came from immigrants, but that hardly makes it a capital of piracy and cheap knock-offs.
Re:China by Sparticus789 · 2012-10-10 08:09 · Score: 1

Yeah - cause no other country EVER thought of THAT before!!
So you are saying China stole the idea to steal other's ideas?

--
sudo make me a sandwich
Re:China by Sparticus789 · 2012-10-10 08:11 · Score: 1

Citation Please

--
sudo make me a sandwich
Re:China by DigiShaman · 2012-10-10 08:28 · Score: 1

True. But it's our own having local Americans reselling this shit to other Americans as well. China may be the source of all this crap, but their certainly not the last link in the chain of deceit and lies. There's plenty of blame to go around.

--
Life is not for the lazy.
Re:China by Jeng · 2012-10-10 08:31 · Score: 1

You may use it as your sig if you like.
And after googling around it looks like I may have come up with it.

--
Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
Re:China by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 08:38 · Score: 0

if you have not read this, I highly recommend it.
http://akessler.blogs.com/andy_kessler/2005/04/hwgh.html
Re:China by Charliemopps · 2012-10-10 08:42 · Score: 1

The United States - The first economy based on hording "ideas" and forcing other countries to pay fees to use those ideas under threat of sanctions or military force. Patents are a very new invention. I wonder if we patented it?
Re:China by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 08:48 · Score: 0

It is more like a design issue than manufacturing issue. Remember that Apple choose to use aluminum instead of the glass or stainless steel or magnesium or titanium etc.
Re:China by quintus_horatius · 2012-10-10 08:53 · Score: 0

Let me google that for you
Re:China by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 09:04 · Score: 0

No need for citation.
Everybody progress by copying.
As you grow your knowledge, unless you prove every law and design every contraption from first principles, you plagiarized the labor of those who gone before you (Newton euphemistically called it standing on the shoulder of giants; but we all know he's nothing but a plagiarzing punk ;-)
I am glad you are one of the rare breed who developed every shred of your knowledge by your own ingenuity. Congratulation on never having read a single textbook.
Re:China by Jeng · 2012-10-10 09:12 · Score: 1

That isn't pulling good results, I've only skimmed this article so far but it looks like a decent starting point.
http://www.ladas.com/Patents/USPatentHistory.html

--
Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
Re:China by drinkypoo · 2012-10-10 10:10 · Score: 2

The difference is that Japan and Germany got their acts together and started doing their own thing, and China had their act together but then stopped doing their own thing and just copying everyone else, usually badly and never with any improvement. Japanese stuff was smaller, better, and cheaper. German stuff is just as big, twice as good, and just as expensive if not twice as expensive. Chinese stuff? OK at best. I seriously miss the days of "Made in Japan" and I only barely remember them.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:China by Sparticus789 · 2012-10-10 10:21 · Score: 1

I believe patenting the patent would cause the universe to implode.

--
sudo make me a sandwich
Re:China by quintus_horatius · 2012-10-10 11:28 · Score: 2

When I did the search earlier, the results included How piracy built the U.S. publishing industry.
Re:China by tompaulco · 2012-10-10 12:21 · Score: 1

Paul Ryan asks "Where are the jobs, Mr. President?", which is funny since he knows Mitt Romney shipped them overseas.
I'm confused. Wouldn't Mitt Romney need to be president first before blaming him for sending all the jobs overseas?

--
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
Re:China by Ellis+D.+Tripp · 2012-10-10 13:00 · Score: 1, Informative

Nope. Working as a corporate raider for Bain Capital was sufficient.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/bain-capital-mitt-romney-outsourcing-china-global-tech
http://www.forbes.com/sites/frederickallen/2012/07/12/how-mitt-romney-invested-millions-in-outsourcing/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/romneys-bain-capital-invested-in-companies-that-moved-jobs-overseas/2012/06/21/gJQAsD9ptV_story.html

--
Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
Re:China by rueger · 2012-10-10 14:30 · Score: 2

Sorry kids, but there was also a time when "Made in Japan" was synonymous with "crap." The pre-Sony days if you will.

--
Three Squirrels
Re:China by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 15:13 · Score: 0

Somewhat ironic then that almost everything "Japanese" is copied from the Chinese from the language to traditional ceramic and metallurgy.
Perhaps there are redeeming opportunity to the copycat come lately Chinese in the manner of the Japanese example :)
Re:China by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 20:03 · Score: 0

I thought that was well-known. You really pissed off the Brits, whose industrial technology you stole. They were the original ones who developed all the ideas...

Returns... by DarthVain · 2012-10-10 06:46 · Score: 1

When I first read title, I was thinking that I bet they don't get too many retuns of defective products... :)

But I guess they aren't actually fake, they are just not the Brand they say they are, and don't work as well.

Re:Returns... by bluefoxlucid · 2012-10-10 07:09 · Score: 1

When I read the summary, I was thinking "far below the PRICE you stupid monkeys! 'Value' is not 'Price'!" Airbags are such worthless shit. (The statistics on airbag "lives saved" works like this: if you have a collision and the airbag deploys and the collision theoretically could be fatal and you didn't die, airbag saved your life. On top of that, seatbelts are often crippled--slow locks, no centripital lock, etc--so while a no-airbag standard from the 90s might save you, an airbag failure to deploy in a 2011 will kill you. QED.)

--
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Re:Returns... by Spectre · 2012-10-10 07:22 · Score: 1

When I first read title, I was thinking that I bet they don't get too many retuns of defective products... :)
But I guess they aren't actually fake, they are just not the Brand they say they are, and don't work as well.

counterfeit bags had "consistent malfunctioning," ranging from not deploying on impact to throwing metal shards.
"don't work as well." != "not deploying ... throwing metal shards."
The last thing a person needs while in the process of a vehicular collision is to have their steering wheel explode like a fragmentation grenade.
While "don't work as well" is true, it so much of an understatement as to be NOT TRUE.

--
"Flame away, I wear asbestos underwear"
Re:Returns... by swalve · 2012-10-10 23:46 · Score: 1

You are a moron.
Re:Returns... by bluefoxlucid · 2012-10-11 00:15 · Score: 1

Well how about you buy this plastic spoon I 3D printed? In fact I'll give you 3, a $60 value, all for $14.99 plush shipping!

--
Support my political activism on Patreon.

Capitalism at it's finest by enlefo · 2012-10-10 06:47 · Score: 2

I'd be surprised if this hasn't been happening for some time. Everything else has been KIRFed, look at the variety of cheap crappy aftermarket car parts on eBay.

Re:Capitalism at it's finest by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 07:03 · Score: 0

Except China is communist.
Re:Capitalism at it's finest by poity · 2012-10-10 08:12 · Score: 0

Intellectual property protection is a pillar of capitalism. When people find profit in circumventing that protection, it is not a triumph of capitalism, but a triumph of malfeasance. To say that this case is 'capitalism at its finest' is the same as saying that abuse by the technocrats in Soviet-styled societies exposed the essence of socialism. I doubt many here, including you, would agree with such a claim.

--
your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
Re:Capitalism at it's finest by geoskd · 2012-10-10 08:24 · Score: 1

Except China is communist.
There is a lot of debate over that issue. China has, in many ways, a more capitalistic economy than the united states. State controlled industries are far more common in China, but regulation of non-state controlled commerce is much more lax than in the U.S. Unlike soviet Russia, The Chinese government is not the sole employer, and only strongly dominates industries which relate to what the ruling class perceives as its interests. It is an interesting political landscape, as the government has no direct accountability to its citizens, but is also free to take necessary but unpopular action for the greatest public good. Kind of like playing sim-city on a much larger scale. It is no accident that China is primarily ruled by engineers.
-=Geoskd

--
I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
Re:Capitalism at it's finest by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-11 04:00 · Score: 0

If by lax you mean corrupt.
Oversight is reduced because paying off officials is an institution and considered a normal cost of business.
This is convenient for the Chinese because they can claim to have one policy, but have a completely different one in practice. "Of course dumping toxic chemicals in the river is illegal! We would never condone it. Nevermind that in 99.99% of the time this rule is ignored because inspectors are regularly bought off. - Oh? You caught one red handed? Made a huge public stink? Executions all around! Nothing like some disproportionate human rights violating punishment to keep up the appearance of competency."
You will always have problems like this in a culture that values 'Face' over everything else.

I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by WindBourne · 2012-10-10 06:47 · Score: 1, Insightful

the issue in cases like this, is the pure unadulterated greed that USA and other western nations display. Combine that greed with lack of regulations and we have results just like this.

Personally, I would love to see one or two of the top republicans family members die from this, but not because I wish ill on them. It is because it will take that for neo-cons to realize that THEIR attacks on American regulations, and their constant support of Chinese goods being imported, to change their tune. Until then, America (and the west as a whole) will have to suffer death and sickness all in the interest of bringing in cheaper goods.

--
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.

Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by Ogive17 · 2012-10-10 06:55 · Score: 4, Informative

the issue in cases like this, is the pure unadulterated greed that USA and other western nations display. Combine that greed with lack of regulations and we have results just like this.

How so? This is a bait & switch situation. US company orders a $50 part from China. Someone in China decides to send a $20 part in its' place and pocket the other $30.

--
"Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 06:58 · Score: 1

Communists make substandard parts, and you somehow blame the people in the USA that are fighting for making things in that country again? You're an illogical nutcase.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 07:07 · Score: 1

The genuine part is more like $500 in this case. I'd guess most installers should have enough knowledge of the part to know that at a price of $50, this is exceedingly unlike the actual part. That someone replaced a $50 fake with a $20 fake is the least of the problems.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 07:07 · Score: 1

There are regulations covering that situation (fraud, etc).
As far as greed goes, how is anyone (consumer or body-shop purchaser) to know? You might say that the overly-low price is a clue, but again, how is one to know? The low price could be due to a legitimate production-line over-run.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by WindBourne · 2012-10-10 07:14 · Score: 1, Funny

And yet, I up until recent times, I voted Libertarian. And I suspect that you will never be able to post intelligently.

--
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by WindBourne · 2012-10-10 07:17 · Score: 1, Informative

The AC was correct. These are 1/10th of the price being sold on the market. Otherwise, there is no incentive to walk away from known products.

--
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by WindBourne · 2012-10-10 07:18 · Score: 0

Communists at war with the west, sells a fake product for 1/10th of the price and you do not question why it is 1/10th of the price? YOU are the illogical nutball.

--
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by WindBourne · 2012-10-10 07:20 · Score: 1

1/10th of the price? Nope. Not even close. More importantly, American cars airbags are made in America. European Airbags are made in both EU and America. Yet, in comes a 'product' from China for 1/10th of the price and somebody does not think twice about it? Seriously?

--
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by Spectre · 2012-10-10 07:28 · Score: 1

There are regulations covering that situation (fraud, etc).
As far as greed goes, how is anyone (consumer or body-shop purchaser) to know? You might say that the overly-low price is a clue, but again, how is one to know? The low price could be due to a legitimate production-line over-run.
If you were to purchase (for example) a tire for your car, normally about a $100 item, and you were told the price was $10, wouldn't you be wondering "Why is this only 1/10 the normal price?"
Being 90% below the expected price is not the norm for an overstock situation, even on low-volume items.

--
"Flame away, I wear asbestos underwear"
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by Jeng · 2012-10-10 07:37 · Score: 0

Perhaps you will be able to post intelligently after removal.

So what is your excuse regarding your rather unintelligent posts?

--
Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by sjames · 2012-10-10 07:43 · Score: 1

And yet the ripped off consumer is expected to foot the bill for the inspection and if necessary, the replacement.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by MightyYar · 2012-10-10 08:01 · Score: 1

I don't think that government should be in the business of reimbursing people who were scammed, but I am all for government arresting people who take part in the fraud.

--
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 08:03 · Score: 0

They're only professing to be communists.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by poity · 2012-10-10 08:21 · Score: 1

But consider that it was the Clinton administration that paved the way for China's WTO membership, perhaps you should spread your desire for schadenfreude more evenly across party lines.

--
your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by sjames · 2012-10-10 08:25 · Score: 1

The government should be in the business of making the fraudsters reimburse people who are scammed. They certainly pulled out all the stops to go after Kim Dotcom even when they didn't claim he directly scammed anyone (he is merely suspected of contributory infringement), surely they could pull out a stop or two for someone who is proven to have directly defrauded people.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by MightyYar · 2012-10-10 08:43 · Score: 1

I would think that could be taken care of with a civil suit.

--
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by WindBourne · 2012-10-10 08:47 · Score: 2

Yup, Clinton DID do that. In addition, he gave them permanent MFN.
However, he was hoping that things would be on the up and up. The problem is that since that time, W, and now O, did LITTLE TO NOTHING about China cheating on all aspects of it. Even WTO has said that many issues are up with China, but all are afraid to rock the boat. And I DO point to both parties. However, it is the neo-cons that scream about dropping regulations esp. when goods come from China, AND EVEN are opposed to taking legal actions against Chinese companies. They continue to push for bills that will allow China to dump any goods here and NOT be sued.

--
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by WindBourne · 2012-10-10 08:49 · Score: 1

Ok, you are right. They are no more communist than the top leaders of the Republican party are Republicans OR Patriotic.

--
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by sjames · 2012-10-10 08:53 · Score: 1

Many of the fraudsters are still in China. I notice the Feds did not tell the *AA they should just file civil suits against Dotcom even though it would be a lot easier.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 09:29 · Score: 0

But why aren't there regulations that more or less state that if a non-working part is found, the person responsible for selling it goes to jail for something like manslaughter or something?
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by Ogive17 · 2012-10-10 09:46 · Score: 1

my $50 comment was just for example. I haven't looked at airbag prices recently because it's not a commodity I currently work with.

--
"Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 09:55 · Score: 0

"The unadulterated greed of the USA"... as opposed to the purely benign, respectable culture of manufacturing shoddy knockoffs that injure, poison and kill people that the Chinese have? God damn the USA for wanting to not be ripped off, they're clearly just being greedy! Not like those honorable Chinese.
Are you fucking kidding me?
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by ragefan · 2012-10-10 10:00 · Score: 1

Civil suit means the lawyers get shit tons of money and the defrauded consumers are given a check for $20 towards another replacement air bag, so they still lose.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 10:55 · Score: 0

Usually the consumer doesn't even see these savings. It's somebody in the supply chain or at the body shop that does, and then they pocket the rest of what would be the full price. As long as the insurance company or person having their car fixed doesn't notice, all the better for this scam.
Of course they could trace records of cars in accidents which were affected by this scam, go after the body shops doing repairs for gross negligence, and then trace the supply chain from there.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by WindBourne · 2012-10-10 11:43 · Score: 1

Tell you what. I have 1000 gals of milk that I will sell you for 1/10th of the asking price. Will you buy it and drink some?

--
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by MightyYar · 2012-10-10 11:44 · Score: 1

I don't like class action suits, either - but I doubt this would wind up there. If a mechanic is convicted of defrauding his customers by installing fake airbags, it should be pretty easy to win a claim in small claims court. Even if he's not convicted, you probably still stand a chance of winning - which is not the case if it is treated in the criminal courts. The burden of proof is lower for civil suits, so I think they are better suited for this sort of thing.

--
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by MightyYar · 2012-10-10 11:46 · Score: 1

The governments behavior regarding the *AA is probably not a good starting point with me, since I disagree with that relationship. If you are trying to go after people in China, then obviously you would need the government's help. If your mechanic is knowingly installing these things, small claims court is the proper venue.

--
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 13:45 · Score: 0

You're certainly welcome to sue people instead, if you'd like.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by sjames · 2012-10-10 15:50 · Score: 1

I don't agree with the government's actions with Dotcom myself, but it is telling that it will go so far over the line for the *AA to get someone who at worse is an accessory to copyright infringement but won't lift a finger for a case of outright fraud that could end in loss of life.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by sjames · 2012-10-10 15:52 · Score: 1

Too bad I don't know enough Chinese to file the suit.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by swalve · 2012-10-10 23:49 · Score: 1

Unless tort reform passes, and then you can only sue if the government approves.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by MightyYar · 2012-10-11 01:16 · Score: 1

I don't think it is fair to say they "won't lift a finger"... this warning comes from the NHTSA. TFA also says that the feds arrested a North Carolina man for selling these things. It even says they convicted a Chinese national for manufacturing and selling the bogus airbags on his website. Presumably, if you bought an airbag from Dai Zhensong or his website "Guangzhou Auto Parts" you could recover the cost of the bag ($57) and the installation in small claims court.

--
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by sjames · 2012-10-11 04:10 · Score: 1

Since they already have the guy AND his records (possibly incomplete), and necessarily every sale he made was bogus, why aren't the refunds on their way? Why no strong suggestion to the shops that bought from him that they would do well to offer their customers a free inspection and swap out (or at least meet the customer half way)?
You could get a judgement in small claims court, but with the guy sitting in prison, it will not likely get you anything without some action on the government's part. Hence the note in TFA that the victim is on his own to get the bag swapped out.
So, yes the government did take action against the guy for circumventing it's regulations but it has left the victims on their own.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by MightyYar · 2012-10-11 09:10 · Score: 1

it will not likely get you anything without some action on the government's part.
Small claims court IS action on the government's part. The civil court would have the same power to get money from him as a criminal court.

So, yes the government did take action against the guy for circumventing it's regulations but it has left the victims on their own.
It seems to be contacting as many of the victims as it can find, and is reaching out to the media as well. I'm sorry, but I don't want to go down the path of the government reimbursing every person who has been scammed directly. If I get mugged by a crackhead, should they make sure he reimburses me?

--
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by sjames · 2012-10-11 10:40 · Score: 1

It seems to be contacting as many of the victims as it can find, and is reaching out to the media as well. I'm sorry, but I don't want to go down the path of the government reimbursing every person who has been scammed directly. If I get mugged by a crackhead, should they make sure he reimburses me?
Yes, it should be part of his sentence. How else can he be said to have made his amends?
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by MightyYar · 2012-10-11 11:23 · Score: 1

I'm sorry, but I just can't get on board. If someone was not convicted by a unanimous jury, the victims would have no recourse. In the civil system, you only need a simple majority to win.

--
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by sjames · 2012-10-11 11:28 · Score: 1

I didn't say the criminal court would be the ONLY way to do it, just that it would be a natural part of the sentence. In cases where it can't be proven to the standard of beyond reasonable doubt, then you would need to sue.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by MightyYar · 2012-10-11 12:52 · Score: 1

In that case, the cost is not worth it to society. You are talking about duplicating - not replacing - the infrastructure that is in place on the civil side. And presuming the government is acting as the victim's advocate, to make the process fair you would need a defense advocate. Then, as the victim's advocate, the government would need to do the same discovery that is currently required by you or your lawyers - which would of course mean hiring more lawyers and investigators. And these lawyers wouldn't be able to use hundreds of years of civil methodologies - they would need to adhere to criminal standards. It would be a staggering expansion of the criminal justice system.

--
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by sjames · 2012-10-11 13:28 · Score: 1

Restitution is occasionally required now, particularly where someone is granted probation. There is no need to duplicate infrastructure at all.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by MightyYar · 2012-10-11 23:11 · Score: 1

Restitution != compensation. Restitution is simple to calculate: how much did the defendant make while committing the crime. In the case of the airbags, if the defendant paid restitution it would be about $60, which wouldn't even cover the new inspection.

--
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by MightyYar · 2012-10-11 23:17 · Score: 1

By the way, restitution WAS paid out in this case. But it was $210,738, based not upon the number of victims but upon the number of airbags that were seized (300).

--
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by sjames · 2012-10-12 04:33 · Score: 1

It looks like they did make a gesture in that direction, but only for the cost of the not yet installed airbags. Nothing for the consumers that already got stuck with one who will be on the hook to pay for an inspection and then (if they got a bad one) $1000 for the replacement.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by MightyYar · 2012-10-12 05:10 · Score: 1

Exactly my point. Restitution in fine - the criminal court judge uses the data that was collected anyway to include as part of the punishment. It is simple.
Compensation (what you are talking about) requires a lot more effort. You'd have to hire someone to track down all the victims, and to calculate the compensation due. This would all have to be done after the criminal trial (or else you risk spending the money for no reason), so it would delay sentencing. Sentencing would get more complicated - and with complexity comes more possibility for error and reversal on appeal. Sentencing would start to resemble a civil trial brought by the government, and so would require more work from the defense team as well. But since this is a criminal trial, you'd still have to get consensus from the jury, so the payouts would likely be less than at a civil trial. You'd also be on the hook for public defense, further driving costs up.
IMHO, this would give us a system that is:
1. Slower than the current criminal justice system.
2. More error-prone than the current criminal justice system.
3. More expensive that the current criminal justice system.
4. Lower payouts than the current civil court system.
5. Burden of paying for defense in compensation part of trial moves from the defendant to the people.
Sure, the benefit would be "automatic" compensation - but I don't think it would be worth it on balance.

--
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by sjames · 2012-10-12 05:58 · Score: 1

I see no reason for it to be slower. Any time overhead would be after the trial is over and would be instead of the overhead of thousands of individual civil cases. I see no reason at all it would be more error prone. When you balance the expense of thousands of civil cases (even small claims) against it, it's probably not more expensive. I don't see why the payout would be lower unless the civil courts are overpaying. Finally, what burden of defense? If compensation is ordered as part of the sentence, defense is over.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by MightyYar · 2012-10-12 06:52 · Score: 1

I see no reason for it to be slower.
Time overhead after the trial is over is added to the total trial time. The point is you have people and other resources tied up longer on a case when they could be working on something else.

I see no reason at all it would be more error prone.
It adds complexity, which by definition will add errors unless you also do something to reduce the error rate.

When you balance the expense of thousands of civil cases (even small claims) against it, it's probably not more expensive.
Yes, but who bears the cost? Right now, the two parties. You are proposing that we shift this to the taxpayers.

I don't see why the payout would be lower unless the civil courts are overpaying.
Because in a criminal court you need a unanimous jury, whereas in civil courts you only need a majority.

Finally, what burden of defense? If compensation is ordered as part of the sentence, defense is over.
You need to provide a lawyer to the defendant if he cannot afford one. This is not the case in a civil court. The sentencing phase of the trial would get much more complicated, and so the people would need to pay for a defense lawyer for a much longer period of time than they do now.

--
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by sjames · 2012-10-12 07:45 · Score: 1

Time overhead after the trial is over is added to the total trial time. The point is you have people and other resources tied up longer on a case when they could be working on something else.
By that measure, we can gain an order of magnitude in time efficiency by just setting all inmates free today.

It adds complexity, which by definition will add errors unless you also do something to reduce the error rate.
It won't add any errors to the criminal trial. Errors afterward will be fewer since a single responsable party will be handling it rather than dozens of small claims court judges who learn about the whole debacle hours (at most) before rendering a decision.

Yes, but who bears the cost? Right now, the two parties. You are proposing that we shift this to the taxpayers.
The court fees paid for filing a small claim do not actually cover the costs, it's more like earnest money. The taxpayers pay the rest. Surely you don't suggest we just do away with the courts alltogether because they cost the taxpayer money.

I don't see why the payout would be lower unless the civil courts are overpaying.
You need a unanimous jury to find the defendant guilty. The judge then passes sentence which could include compensation. It's not like the jury will deliberate each individual compensation payment.

You need to provide a lawyer to the defendant if he cannot afford one. This is not the case in a civil court. The sentencing phase of the trial would get much more complicated, and so the people would need to pay for a defense lawyer for a much longer period of time than they do now.
Nonsense. The time overhead would be in the administration of the compensation once the sentence is rendered. Besides which, they have already ordered restitution for large buyers (which closely approximates compensation since they didn't have to pay for installation and won't have to pay for inspections), why leave the little guy hanging out to dry?
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by MightyYar · 2012-10-12 09:06 · Score: 1

By that measure, we can gain an order of magnitude in time efficiency by just setting all inmates free today.

That's different. I'm talking about the trial phase - where you are paying high-cost lawyers and investigators. Jail is nominally for convicted criminals and people too potentially dangerous to release on bail.

Errors afterward will be fewer since a single responsable party will be handling it rather than dozens of small claims court judges who learn about the whole debacle hours (at most) before rendering a decision.
Errors in civil courts don't put an entire criminal trial at risk on appeal.

The court fees paid for filing a small claim do not actually cover the costs, it's more like earnest money.
Yes, but court costs are fixed. You are paying for a judge and the support staff no matter which venue you use, criminal or civil. I'm talking about the cost of prosecution, defense, and investigations. Those are currently all borne by the plaintiff and defendant in civil court, and you are proposing shifting that to the taxpayers.

The judge then passes sentence which could include compensation.
You could certainly limit the compensation phase to a judge's prerogative.

Nonsense. The time overhead would be in the administration of the compensation once the sentence is rendered.

If you are going to make a criminal repay his victims, you sure as heck need to let him argue about the extent of the damages. Otherwise, you are simply stripping the convict of his current right to a civil trial. Restitution, as you point out, can sometimes closely resemble compensation - but it is much, much simpler to calculate, and only involves findings of fact during the criminal trial. You can't base compensation based on findings of fact alone, so you need to let the convict argue for the basis of compensation. This will require a lawyer.
This isn't about living the "little guy out to dry". The little guy was the victim of a scam - not a victim of the government. Are you really going to ask the government to repay every idiot who falls for a scam?

--
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by sjames · 2012-10-12 10:58 · Score: 1

You're completely missing it. The restitution would be part of the sentence and would be handled as a class action. They will not be trying restitution for Joe Blow, then Jim Smith, then Alice Jones. They would declare the class (people who ended up with the knock-off installed and perhaps those who have good reason to believe they did), declare the amount of restitution to members of that class, and done. The administration of the restitution would all come AFTER THE TRIAL IS OVER.

Yes, but court costs are fixed. You are paying for a judge and the support staff no matter which venue you use, criminal or civil.
NO. You can either have one judge one time sentence the defendant to restitution to the class that he wronged OR you can have N judges make N decisions where N is the size of the class (likely in the thousands in this case). Meanwhile, I doubt a convicted felon serving time could appear in person for a few thousand small claims cases. How do you propose to deal with that?
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by MightyYar · 2012-10-12 11:53 · Score: 1

The administration of the restitution would all come AFTER THE TRIAL IS OVER.
If you are talking restitution, I'm fine with that. Restitution is easy to calculate and was in fact done in this case. I suspect you meant to type compensation? In that case, it sounds like you are suggesting a purely administrative process to determine the amount of compensation. I think this deprives the convict of property without due process, and I do not think such a law would stand up to court scrutiny.

You can either have one judge one time sentence the defendant to restitution to the class that he wronged

Again, I'm assuming you meant "compensation".
One thing that might satisfy both of us is to automatically kick off a civil class action suit in cases where there are many victims. I still don't think there should be any significant amount of taxpayer money involved, and it might be very difficult to find lawyers who will take the case - the money is likely to never be recovered, after all.
Think about the math here: the guy sold 300 $575 parts that cost him some non-zero amount of money to manufacture and ship. At best, he made $17,100. The restitution then used the real part cost of over $700, so it was calculated at $210,000. I have no idea where that money went, but I suspect it doesn't exist, and probably renders our whole conversation moot :)

Meanwhile, I doubt a convicted felon serving time could appear in person for a few thousand small claims cases. How do you propose to deal with that?
I presume this is a solved problem. Many people are suing Bernie Madoff.

--
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by sjames · 2012-10-12 12:46 · Score: 1

I presume this is a solved problem. Many people are suing Bernie Madoff.
In small claims court? Probably not many. Small claims court typically does not allow either party to be represented by an attorney in court.
I could buy a class action like proceeding, preferably one where they automatically include the criminal court's findings before it even starts. By that time, the facts of the case have already been determined to a higher than necessary standard.
Re:I do not trust Chinese manufacturing, BUT .... by MightyYar · 2012-10-12 13:53 · Score: 1

In small claims court?

LOL, I bet those people wish it was small claims court....

I could buy a class action like proceeding, preferably one where they automatically include the criminal court's findings before it even starts. By that time, the facts of the case have already been determined to a higher than necessary standard.
Yeah, that could actually work. And the cases that don't get picked up by the hungry lawyers probably don't have any potential for recovery, anyway.

--
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.

LOL by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 06:50 · Score: 0

Free market, bitches! Get duh gubmint out of my scams!!

They really don't work by Animats · 2012-10-10 06:51 · Score: 0

NHTSA testing showed consistent malfunctioning ranging from non-deployment of the air bag to the expulsion of metal shrapnel during deployment.

Re:They really don't work by Farmer+Tim · 2012-10-10 07:13 · Score: 4, Funny

...the expulsion of metal shrapnel during deployment.
Finally! I've been advocating something like this for years: install a device that ensures certain death in a crash and everyone will drive way more carefully.

--
Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.

Not covered by insurance or the auto shop? by jest3r · 2012-10-10 06:52 · Score: 2

Since the inspection and replacement is not covered by insurance or the auto shop I can only imagine that these counterfeit airbags will be on teh road for a long time.

Considering many / most people would go through insurance to get a new airbag installed as it's typically one part of a bigger job (ie. your front bumper assembly and other parts probably needed replacing at the same time) it's strange that Insurance would not cover the inspection.

You just paid a deductible just to get the work done and now you are being told that you need to pay to get it re-inspected and then you need to pay if the airbag is indeed a fake.

The burden shouldn't be on the consumer unless they knowingly purchased it and installed it themselves.

Re:Not covered by insurance or the auto shop? by sunking2 · 2012-10-10 07:17 · Score: 1

The problem is it's a relatively small percentage of bags that have been replaced. In most cases the inspection will come up negative so the insurance company and certainly the shop won't cover the cost of inspection. In cases where one is found I'm assuming you can go after the shop who installed.
Re:Not covered by insurance or the auto shop? by tompaulco · 2012-10-10 12:25 · Score: 1

The burden shouldn't be on the consumer unless they knowingly purchased it and installed it themselves.
Well, the burden also shouldn't be on the body shop unless they knowingly purchased it and installed it. Neither should it be on the Insurance Company unless they told the company to use the knowingly bad product. The burden of the cost should be on the Chinese company that sold it.

--
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
Re:Not covered by insurance or the auto shop? by swalve · 2012-10-10 23:54 · Score: 1

That's what lawsuits are for. You sue the person who put in the bad airbag, and they sue the person who sold them the bad airbag, and so on.
Re:Not covered by insurance or the auto shop? by fishb0ne · 2012-10-11 05:57 · Score: 1

I understand your point of view, but why do you feel this is owed by the insurance company? The insurance company owes the policyholder indemnity, and that is, the cost to repair the vehicle. The policyholder has the ultimate say who does the repair. The insurance company paid for an OE airbag replacement. The shop (most likely) unknowingly put the counterfeit in. It is between the owner of the vehicle and the body shop at that point.

Nice headline by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 06:52 · Score: 0

Counterfeit Air Bag Racket Blows Up 16

Fry: I get it!

I do not trust "sell by..." by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 06:54 · Score: 1

Well since it's our greed (does the consumer desire for cheaper products count?) that's responsible. You shouldn't have a problem with stricter laws then?

Somehow by WillgasM · 2012-10-10 06:59 · Score: 0

this will mean the DHS needs to seize more websites.

Re:The time has come by K.+S.+Kyosuke · 2012-10-10 07:02 · Score: 5, Funny

Your nukes have fake Chinese slapper detonators, they won't explode on hitting the target. You'll only be supplying them with cheap extra plutonium.

--
Ezekiel 23:20

Thank goodness my faulty airbag is not counterfeit by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 07:03 · Score: 0

Nice to know (from checking the list of affected vehicles) that my "airbag" light that has been periodically going on and off over the last few years (after it went out of warranty...and after it was addressed multiple times *IN* warranty) is the product of just plain old lousy design and/or manufacturing. If I die in a crash because the airbag doesn't deploy, I'd feel much better about it being said at my funeral that it was because I refused to keep paying the hundreds of dollars every so often to my local dealership to not properly fix my airbag rather than it being said that I died due to a counterfeit airbag.

I'll be sleeping much better tonight...

Beware the air bag..... by SternisheFan · 2012-10-10 07:04 · Score: 4, Interesting

You even need to be careful of the legit air bags.... http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-57444565-71/airbag-saves-man-then-kills-him/

Re:Beware the air bag..... by sjames · 2012-10-10 07:50 · Score: 1

Gotta love the claim that inhaling a lungfull of fine silicate glass dust should be 'harmless'
If he was wearing his seat belt, it is unlikely that the airbag played any part in saving him.
Re:Beware the air bag..... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 08:17 · Score: 0

I highly doubt it. The white powder is talc used to prevent the folded airbag from sticking together. And glas piercing the bag is also no big deal as it isn't airtight anyway but has openings on the backside to allow soft deflation when the body impacts the blown airbag.
Re:Beware the air bag..... by SternisheFan · 2012-10-10 09:22 · Score: 1

Gotta love the claim that inhaling a lungfull of fine silicate glass dust should be 'harmless'
If he was wearing his seat belt, it is unlikely that the airbag played any part in saving him.
Doesn't the driver need to be belted in, in order for the airbag to activate? I think there's some sort of fail-safe interlock system that won't let the bag fire up unless the driver/passenger can be assumed to be belted in and therefore correctly positioned. I think this got implemented after injury lawsuits started happening.
Re:Beware the air bag..... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 10:55 · Score: 0

No, most airbag systems are called SRS which stands for Supplementary Restraint System, the original reason for airbags was to act as a passive safety system aka one that required no action from the driver. The original mandates from the federal government required only that the system not require the passengers/drivers to activate the system which is why those automated safety belts where used. This then became the airbag mandate which I think is a regulatory mistake, the government should have created a set of standards for head injure, etc that cars must pass. What we have now is a forced use of a technology by law which is always a mistake the government should set goals not use this technology or else. Obviously, few are going to look for alternatives to airbags which may even be safer with less draw backs if the law says use Airbags.
Re:Beware the air bag..... by SternisheFan · 2012-10-10 13:20 · Score: 2

The best seat belt restraints are the 2 belt 'X' system, what racecar drivers u, but just getting drivers years ago to click the one "three-point" buckle was hard enough for the NTSB to do. To get drivers to click two buckles every time was asking too much.
The history of the seat belt... http://www.stnonline.com/resources/seat-belts/the-history-of-seat-belt-development
History of the airbag... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbag
Re:Beware the air bag..... by swalve · 2012-10-11 00:01 · Score: 1

That's a fancy article and all, but it's a spurious connection between the airbag and the pneumonia. Two months is a long time. It takes more than sarcasm and a coroner saying "misadventure" to come even close to proof.
Re:Beware the air bag..... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-11 08:23 · Score: 0

The danger of wearing a full 5 or 6 point harness is that, unless your car has a proper roll cage, in rollover accidents your neck will get crushed. 3-point belts let you fall towards the center of the car away from the collapsing roof.
Re:Beware the air bag..... by SternisheFan · 2012-10-12 01:50 · Score: 1

I didn't know that, thanks. 20 years or more ago I flipped a car going into a newly wet road curve, doing 50mph upside down. Nothing I could do once it started flipping, just watched out the window thinking, "Well, you don't see 'this' every day!" The 3point belt did me good, just some little cuts on my forearms from the sunroof splintering. Without it, who knows...

Just the fake parts by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 07:10 · Score: 0

They're not talking about most 3rd-party replacement parts, which may or may not be decent quality but at least the customer would know what they were buying. Instead they're talking about 3rd-party replacement parts that have been falsely labeled and sold as OEM parts, at the highly-inflated OEM prices. It's almost a sure bet those re-branded parts are poor quality.

Extradition? by Bob9113 · 2012-10-10 07:11 · Score: 4, Insightful

tens of thousands of car owners may be driving vehicles with counterfeit air bags, which fail to inflate properly or don't inflate at all. ... Dai Zhensong, a Chinese citizen, had the counterfeit air bags manufactured

Given how hard we've been trying to extradite Kim Dotcom for facilitating copyright infringement, I assume we will be getting at least as heavy handed with China over this guy's tens of thousands of cases of attempted fraudulent homicide (or whatever it is called).

--
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance

Re:Extradition? by ilsaloving · 2012-10-10 08:47 · Score: 2

Of course not. We're talking about people's lives, not money. Now maybe if Ford made an IP complaint about the airbag design, then maybe...

And to think.... by cayenne8 · 2012-10-10 07:13 · Score: 2, Insightful

And to think...we were seriously considering giving the Chinese control of a large part of our telecommunications systems and other infrastructure.....more than they already have.

What are our officials thinking!?!?

--
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........

Re:And to think.... by Quiet_Desperation · 2012-10-10 07:30 · Score: 5, Insightful

What are our officials thinking!?!?
"Money. Power. Money. Power. Money. Fucking. Money. Power. Money. Power. Money. Fucking. Money. Power. Money. Power. Money. Booze."
And so on.
You people have *got* to stop thinking of politicians as sane, reasonable human beings. Honestly, much of the noise in the world starts to make complete sense when you just accept that.
Re:And to think.... by judoguy · 2012-10-10 07:59 · Score: 1

They *are* sane, reasonable human beings. Just evil. The two aren't mutually exclusive. They are parasites that have a willing, or at least passive, host.
Quite reasonable and rational from their point of view.

--
Peace is easy to achieve, just surrender. Liberty is much harder get/keep.
Re:And to think.... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 08:21 · Score: 0

And to think...we were seriously considering giving the Chinese control of a large part of our telecommunications systems and other infrastructure.....more than they already have.
What are our officials thinking!?!?
They're thinking that communication in the hands of the plebs can only lead to disaster (for them), so anything that could possibly damage our telecommunications systems or throw their reliability/privacy into question is fine by them, and is in fact encouraged.
Re:And to think.... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 08:39 · Score: 0

you forgot "hookers" somewhere in there or three.
Re:And to think.... by Fjandr · 2012-10-10 11:40 · Score: 1

No, for many of them "fucking" is synonymous with "hookers."
Re:And to think.... by Coop · 2012-10-10 11:59 · Score: 1

Isn't this airbag mess more an example of the free market in action? Just like letting Huwei build our telecom equipment? And didn't the government just quash that particular bit of business?

--
"If you're not passionate about your operating system, you're married to the wrong one."
Re:And to think.... by LoRdTAW · 2012-10-10 12:23 · Score: 1

You forgot Blow.
Re:And to think.... by Quiet_Desperation · 2012-10-11 07:39 · Score: 1

They're sociopaths. It's still listed as a disorder in the latest DSM, under ASPD.
Re:And to think.... by Quiet_Desperation · 2012-10-11 07:50 · Score: 1

Pretty much what I had in mind, along with the fact that they get a lot of sycophants who throw themselves at the powerful for free.
I think all Monica got was stained dress, yes? ;-)
Must be nice to have no conscience.
Re:And to think.... by RockDoctor · 2012-10-11 10:33 · Score: 1

Isn't this airbag mess more an example of the free market in action? Just like letting Huwei build our telecom equipment? And didn't the government just quash that particular bit of business?
Shock! Horror! USian govt turns Communist!
Revolution imminent!
Lenin's embalmed corpse is waking up and planning a move to Chicago, the better to oversee the revolution.
I'm just wondering what happened to Stalin's stiff? Ah, Kremlin Wall Necropolis, just along from Lenin's tomb. I'll remember that, mostly to make sure that I don't go to the wrong one, next time I'm killing time in Moscow.

--
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"

Only 37%, really? by funnyguy · 2012-10-10 07:13 · Score: 1

"But only 37 percent of auto dealers have their own body shops, according to information on the National Association of Automobile Dealers' website."

Ok, I've NEVER seen a franchise dealer who doesn't also have a repair shop. It may not be onsite, but at another one of their locations, etc. I think of a body shop as a TOTALLY different thing, art vs mechanical, if you will. Many dealers will use a local body shop for body work. As far as repair, thats where dealers have a good chance to make money. All the little old ladies take their cars to their dealer for oil changes at $80 a pop.

This number must be including non-franchised dealers, as in used-car dealers.

Re:Only 37%, really? by drinkypoo · 2012-10-10 10:19 · Score: 1

"But only 37 percent of auto dealers have their own body shops, according to information on the National Association of Automobile Dealers' website."
Ok, I've NEVER seen a franchise dealer who doesn't also have a repair shop. It may not be onsite, but at another one of their locations, etc. I think of a body shop as a TOTALLY different thing
I didn't chase these quotes down so I don't know if I'm just misunderstanding you, but the quoted text specifically refers to a body shop, which is where an air bag is going to get replaced, as they're the people who deal with interiors. It's not inconceivable that a dealer would do an air bag replacement in their own shop but it's also fairly likely that they would farm it out to a body shop and still make a profit, both selling them the air bag (in most cases) and for taking your money. Also, there are definitely dealers out there without a real service center. They will do oil changes and the like, but they send you either to another dealer or to a local shop for warranty work. They will usually also have the magic scan tool so that they can do more meaningful electronic diagnosis using the OBD-II codes mere mortals are not permitted to know, perform firmware updates, and so on.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"

Do like Japan does with imported autos by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 07:15 · Score: 0

How is anyone to know that the part is substandard?

Well, we could do like Japan does: require the importer to disassemble each one (not just a manufacturer selected sample set) for sub-part safety inspection by government inspectors and then reassemble before sale.

Wow shocker... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 07:15 · Score: 0

they came from China... I am totally shocked by this(Sarcasm heavy)

Whew, I'm safe by damn_registrars · 2012-10-10 07:24 · Score: 0

I can't afford any of the cars on that list - they either are too expensive on the used market at any age, or they are too new to be on the used market at an affordable price.

This suggests these counterfeit airbags will mostly kill wealthy people, or at least people who are wealthier than I am. If they were cheap enough to acquire a bogus bag, I have no pity for them.

--
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.

Re:Whew, I'm safe by 6332J1N · 2012-10-10 08:11 · Score: 1

You can't afford a five year-old Hyundai Elantra?

--
Never underestimate the power of very stupid people in very large numbers.
Re:Whew, I'm safe by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 08:25 · Score: 0

Yeah, no chance they were charged full price and the difference pocketed by the shop right? Did you even think before posting or did you just see a chance to dig at people more successful than yourself and charge ahead?
Re:Whew, I'm safe by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 08:26 · Score: 0

You've missed the point of the article. The owners of vehicles aren't being cheap, it's the repair shops that your insurer sends you to in the event of an accident. You may be told you are getting OEM parts, but it's hard to verify in the case of an airbag. It also appears that some shops are having the wool pulled over their eyes by their parts suppliers as some of the fakes have proper markings.
Re:Whew, I'm safe by damn_registrars · 2012-10-10 09:17 · Score: 2

You can't afford a five year-old Hyundai Elantra?
A 2007 Hyundai Elantra with 50,000 miles in very good condition has a private party blue book in excess of $8,000. While I could (though would not want to) finance it, I most certainly don't have $8,000 sitting around doing nothing to frivolously spend on an underpowered and unenjoyable Korean sedan.

--
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Re:Whew, I'm safe by mjwx · 2012-10-10 15:51 · Score: 1

You can't afford a five year-old Hyundai Elantra?
A 2007 Hyundai Elantra with 50,000 miles in very good condition has a private party blue book in excess of $8,000. While I could (though would not want to) finance it, I most certainly don't have $8,000 sitting around doing nothing to frivolously spend on an underpowered and unenjoyable Korean sedan.
80,000 KM for a 5 year old car is really at the bottom of the range, 100,000-120,000 is more realistic. 60,000 KM is basically a new car.

And lets be honest, the kind of person who buys a Hyundai Elantra would not have kept them in good cond.

--
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Re:Whew, I'm safe by slacker001 · 2012-10-11 01:40 · Score: 1

50k miles, not kilometers.
Re:Whew, I'm safe by mjwx · 2012-10-11 12:01 · Score: 1

50k miles, not kilometers.
Try doing the conversion on that.

Most of the world deals in KM's, it's not my fault you're a bit backwards. Also, it's Kilometres.

--
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.

Videos by RdeCourtney · 2012-10-10 07:26 · Score: 1

Here's the video's of counterfeit airbags.. my particular favourite is the second one.. at least you whilst you lay their dying, you can enjoy a fireworks show! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEYExJhYbg8

--
Insert signature here...

Wear a seat belt by flyingfsck · 2012-10-10 08:00 · Score: 0

The bags are redundant and a waste of money.

--
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!

Re:Wear a seat belt by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 08:31 · Score: 0

Ah.. you are aware seat belts and air bags aren't mutually exclusive aren't you? Air bags aren't designed to replace a seat belt, they are designed assuming the occupant is wearing a seat belt. Also we aren't just talking about frontal crash air bags. How does a seat belt prevent your head from hitting the window in a side impact? It doesn't, that's what side curtain airbags do.
Re:Wear a seat belt by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 08:50 · Score: 0

wouldn't be nice if there was a way to set things up that if you don't put on you seatbelt the airbags would not work. Then you could rule anybody killed while not wearing a seatbelt (in a auto accident) as a suicide.
or better yet a disable airbag key (like say putting on your seatbelt) that would allow you to choose not to use them thus making it safe for you to drive (some airbags will deploy after minimal impact)
maybe you darwinists may like it better if everyone in an accident died as they were to stupid to live anyway (well at least if they don't wear a seatbelt.
Re:Wear a seat belt by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 09:04 · Score: 0

some airbags will deploy after minimal impact
Maybe on older systems but newer vehicles have moved to 3 stage deploy systems.
Re:Wear a seat belt by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 09:37 · Score: 0

it is understood that airbags are a supplement to seatbelts and i do suppose that the curtain airbags would help minimally in a side impact. however the main focus of the current tirade in /Dot is the frontal airbags and they do more harm than good (esp pre 1990).
with that in mind my sarcasm of not wearing a seatbelt and a persons self chosen demise stands.
Re:Wear a seat belt by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 09:44 · Score: 0

i was mainly focused on the pre 1990 systems. although http://www.anapolschwartz.com/practices/air-bag-failure/air-bag-recalls.asp this make it more poinent that is is still hapening.
also there are other effects that show detriment when airbags deploy http://www.units.muohio.edu/spa/documents/subjective_otologic_effects.pdf such as hearing loss/damage
Re:Wear a seat belt by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 09:53 · Score: 0

In my car the button for the passenger airbag is next to the driver, but the traction control button is on the passenger side.
Re:Wear a seat belt by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 10:36 · Score: 0

You obviously haven't done the research on this topic.

Re:Thank goodness my faulty airbag is not counterf by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 08:09 · Score: 0

Most probably it is not a problem with the airbag itself but a problem with one of the several sensors required for the airbag control unit (not part of the airbag but somewhere under the dash) to correctly determine if, when and how strong it should deploy the airbag.

Imports come from everywhere by sjbe · 2012-10-10 08:12 · Score: 4, Informative

True, but doesn't most of the crap bought in the U.S. come from China?

Not even remotely. Year to date in 2012 the US has imported about $235 billion in goods from China (out of ~$1323 billion total imports) which accounts for a little under 18% of total imports. Not even under the most wild definition of "most" does most of the stuff we buy come from China.

Re:Imports come from everywhere by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 08:43 · Score: 3, Informative

depends on how you define "most". if it is china vs. not-china (everyone else combined) then you are correct it is
not more that 1/2 of total imports (18% as you say) but if the question is "which country do we import most stuff"
than the answers is China - top of the list at 18% (then Canada @ ~14% and Mexico @ ~12%, Japan @ ~6%
and then drops off rapidly)
Re:Imports come from everywhere by eugene+ts+wong · 2012-10-10 09:07 · Score: 2

Also, dollar value doesn't convey the number of items that are imported. Imagine buying $.01 widgets from China, and $1,000,000,000 luxury cars from all other places. I can imagine that less objects would come from all other places.

--
testing out my trending skills
Re:Imports come from everywhere by Coop · 2012-10-10 11:57 · Score: 4, Informative

The share of Chinese imports gets substantially higher when you subtract oil from the total, at $400-500 billion per year.

--
"If you're not passionate about your operating system, you're married to the wrong one."
Re:Imports come from everywhere by swalve · 2012-10-10 23:35 · Score: 1

By dollar amount, sure. But those $15 DVD players cross the border with about $1 of value stamped on them. So for every $50,000 BMW we import from Germany, we are importing 50,000 DVD players from China. So the OP might be right, if you are counting by numbers of units.
Re:Imports come from everywhere by sjbe · 2012-10-11 06:28 · Score: 1

The share of Chinese imports gets substantially higher when you subtract oil from the total, at $400-500 billion per year.
Taking random things out doesn't serve purpose. We can lower Chinese imports if we subtract steel but it would be just as pointless.
Oh, and the total amount of crude oil imported into the US in 2011 was around $225 billion according to the US Census Bureau.

Anybody that buys an airbag on eBay is an idiot by sirwired · 2012-10-10 08:26 · Score: 1

While I feel sorry for those that had counterfeit airbags put in place by a body shop shooting for cheap-ass parts (or insurance companies forcing cheap-ass parts on their policyholders) anybody buying an airbag for $80 on eBay is a complete blithering idiot.

Airbags are the one and only part of my car where I would only purchase new, from the dealer, every time. No junkyard or aftermarket airbags would EVER go on my car.

I'm a big fan of pick-and-pull junkyards, and I've bought plenty of aftermarket parts, but airbags are just too critical, and twitchy, to trust to anything but new, dealer parts.

And yes, they are expensive and overpriced, but you gotta do what you gotta do...

It's usually not the fault of the driver by sirwired · 2012-10-10 08:29 · Score: 1

Most of these bags were put in by body shops (and/or insurance companies) goosing their profit margin by using dodgy aftermarket parts. Very few of the people with these bags (save the idiots who bought them on eBay) actually went out and bought those parts; they were just put in as part of body work. It's not unreasonable for a consumer to expect a body shop to put in parts that are not a steaming pile of garbage.

Re:It's usually not the fault of the driver by damn_registrars · 2012-10-10 09:24 · Score: 1

Most of these bags were put in by body shops (and/or insurance companies) goosing their profit margin by using dodgy aftermarket parts. Very few of the people with these bags (save the idiots who bought them on eBay) actually went out and bought those parts; they were just put in as part of body work. It's not unreasonable for a consumer to expect a body shop to put in parts that are not a steaming pile of garbage.
You have a valid point, however if a customer is quoted $500 for an airbag and then the shop says "we can do it for $80 instead", they should be weary. After all we're not talking about a replacement rear view mirror here, we're talking about a critical safety device. Of course, it could be a case of the shop / insurance company being unscrupulous, in which case there was nothing the owner of the car could have done. But the shops are supposed to keep the records of all parts they install so that their customers can inspect them upon request. If a customer does not ask to do that, then they are partially at fault for accepting a crappy part - especially if there was no intentional deception from the shop.

After all, just because a lot of people have horror stories about getting screwed by immoral repair shops, that doesn't mean that they are all crooks.

--
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Re:It's usually not the fault of the driver by drinkypoo · 2012-10-10 10:08 · Score: 1

You have a valid point, however if a customer is quoted $500 for an airbag and then the shop says "we can do it for $80 instead", they should be weary
I'm weary of seeing weary used in place of wary. Unfortunately, the customer has no way to know that anything suspicious is occurring, because they're only peripherally involved in the transaction in many insurance cases. They call the insurance company to make a claim, and the insurance company tells them where to go. They can go anywhere, but they usually just go there. The insurance company chooses that shop because they're slightly cheaper. They're slightly cheaper because they cut corners, and do the job much cheaper. Instead of using the nice body filler they use the cheap stuff. Instead of doing it right they do it fast. Etc. They bill the insurance company for list less ten percent instead of list plus ten percent and they use a crappy part that costs half list or less, like a knockoff door skin out of china instead of a real door skin recycled right here with our own labor, or a fake air bag, or whatever you might be dealing with.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:It's usually not the fault of the driver by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 10:48 · Score: 0

Who says the shop charged them less just because they were supplying a cheap part?

What, you think they contain propellant? by Ellis+D.+Tripp · 2012-10-10 08:46 · Score: 5, Informative

Actually making a counterfeit functional would cut into their profits.

I would be surprised if these things actually contained any energetic materials at all. Probably just a short-circuited connector to fool the idiot light circuit, and an empty housing, filled with sand or whatever for weight.

The Chinese were caught sending counterfeit circuit breakers over here a few years ago, with nothing inside but a switch. No overcurrent protection at all. They have no qualms at all about faking safety-critical devices to make a buck...

--
Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org

Re:What, you think they contain propellant? by X0563511 · 2012-10-10 09:22 · Score: 4, Informative

People should be shot for such bullshit. That kind of thing kills people.

--
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
Re:What, you think they contain propellant? by drinkypoo · 2012-10-10 10:01 · Score: 1

The Chinese were caught sending counterfeit circuit breakers over here a few years ago,

What, all billion of them? How many fake breakers did they send?

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:What, you think they contain propellant? by tragedy · 2012-10-10 11:25 · Score: 1

The Chinese government has, in fact, been known to shoot people for that sort of thing.
Re:What, you think they contain propellant? by gweihir · 2012-10-10 15:25 · Score: 2

Apparently not enough of them. Time to pick up the pace.

--
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Re:What, you think they contain propellant? by swalve · 2012-10-10 23:00 · Score: 1

Only when they get caught.
Re:What, you think they contain propellant? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-11 00:35 · Score: 0

People should be shot for such bullshit.
in China, it actually may happen.

About time this became a big story. by Vellmont · 2012-10-10 08:47 · Score: 2

About a year and half ago I looked into buying a salvage car that was in a minor accident and repairing it myself. Cars these days have at least 6 air bags + seat belt tensioners, and having 3-4 of them blow is very common in an accident. Replacing the air bags is a MAJOR expense, so I looked into ebay and other sources of air bags. There are/were several sites that sold these bags at greatly reduced prices, in high numbers for all car makers. This didn't make a hell of a lot of sense, as they were even cheaper than junkyards. After a bit of digging I found that counterfeit bags were a problem, and the ebay bags were most likely counterfeit.

I can't of course prove that these bags were counterfeit, but nothing else really made any sense. I actually abandoned my salvage car project after it didn't really make any financial and risk management sense. Real bags from the automaker are very expensive, and then you have to worry about screwing it all up if you DIY. In the end I didn't want to hold myself responsible for a passenger in my car being seriously injured because I wanted to save $1000.

--
AccountKiller

Re:About time this became a big story. by couchslug · 2012-10-10 12:19 · Score: 1

The usual way dealers etc repair salvage cars is by buying another car with the parts they need, then parting/scrapping the leftovers.

--
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."

The free market will sort it out. by tekrat · 2012-10-10 08:48 · Score: 1, Insightful

Please cut those job-killing regulations of big government. Business can police themselves. If your face is crushed by a defective airbag, people will avoid buying those and the genuine article will rise in the marketplace. That's how capitalism works, build a better mousetrap and all that.

I'm sure Ryan will make some argument like that tomorrow night, After all, he worships Ayn Rand. If you moochers don't appreciate the entrepreneurial effort of job creator and industrialist Sheng Zhuiangh in China, then make your own better airbag and compete.

--
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.

Re:The free market will sort it out. by trout007 · 2012-10-10 11:16 · Score: 1

Well nobody is forcing car maker to put airbags in. Right?

--
I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
Re:The free market will sort it out. by Dachannien · 2012-10-10 11:45 · Score: 1

A truly free market is based on perfect information, in which everyone knows that these knockoffs are knockoffs and can make a rational decision whether to buy a knockoff or the real McCoy. Paul Ryan may not agree with this, but a true supporter of the free market would support regulations to fix this source of imperfect information and thereby permit the free market to solve the problem on its own.
Re:The free market will sort it out. by PPH · 2012-10-10 12:00 · Score: 1

Airbags are one option for a safety system for people who won't voluntarily put on seatbelts. The other option are those motorized seatbelts that put themselves on when you start the car.
Since seatbelt use is now mandatory, the airbag/auto seatbelt requirement should be dropped.
Airbags are useless at preventing occupant ejections anyway. The best system are those seatbelts that cinch themselves when the accelerometers detect a crash.

--
Have gnu, will travel.
Re:The free market will sort it out. by dunkelfalke · 2012-10-10 18:30 · Score: 1

You are talking about American airbags. European ones are specifically made to work together with seat belts.

--
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap

looks like.... by WGFCrafty · 2012-10-10 09:03 · Score: 1

This scheme blew up in people's faces. Or it blew up in peoples faces by not blowing up In peoples faces.

No problem here by GameboyRMH · 2012-10-10 09:39 · Score: 1

My cars don't have airbags :-P

--
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel

Newton? Try Bernardus Carnotensis... by slew · 2012-10-10 09:57 · Score: 2

(Newton euphemistically called it standing on the shoulder of giants; but we all know he's nothing but a plagiarzing punk ;-)

Yes apparently Newton was a plagarizing punk (your words, not mine)... See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_on_the_shoulders_of_giants

Air bags? No thanks. by DigiTechGuy · 2012-10-10 10:04 · Score: 1

Good thing I don't drive any vehicles with air bags.I'll stick with my simple, cheap and reliable vehicles that won't try to kill me.

I get it. by Arancaytar · 2012-10-10 10:10 · Score: 1

Easy profit, and dead people don't usually sue. Makes perfect sense.

If you're fucking evil, that is.

Re:I get it. by ThatsMyNick · 2012-10-10 14:12 · Score: 1

Dead person's estate does sue though.

Not the first... by slew · 2012-10-10 10:14 · Score: 1

China - The first economy based of stealing other people's ideas and manufacturing it for less.

Samuel Slater anyone? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-15002318

Of course the British couldn't help themselves either...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2178330/Royal-Worcester-porcelain-Remarkable-diary-porcelain-maker-1791-details-stole-trade-secrets.html
http://www.amazon.com/For-All-Tea-China-Favorite/dp/B003D0ZUOK

I wonder about this by roc97007 · 2012-10-10 10:21 · Score: 1

I've had three accidents in the last 20 years that required a visit to a body shop. In each case there was considerable damage requiring considerable time in a body shop. (In two cases the cars were totalled by insurance, but I bought them back and had them repaired anyway.) Now, in none of the accidents did any of the air bags deploy. But, now I'm thinking, if my car goes to an independent shop, would there be a profit margin in swapping out my airbag for a fake so they had a real airbag to install elsewhere? (Is this even possible?)

--
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.

Re:I wonder about this by SternisheFan · 2012-10-10 15:33 · Score: 1

I've had three accidents in the last 20 years that required a visit to a body shop. In each case there was considerable damage requiring considerable time in a body shop. (In two cases the cars were totalled by insurance, but I bought them back and had them repaired anyway.) Now, in none of the accidents did any of the air bags deploy. But, now I'm thinking, if my car goes to an independent shop, would there be a profit margin in swapping out my airbag for a fake so they had a real airbag to install elsewhere? (Is this even possible?)
Of course. It has gone on since airbags first came out. A person can remove them from a car, sell them to less than honorable types for less than half their actual worth, and still leave with a couple hundred bucks. A thief mechanic will leave noobvious trace, a street thief won't care about hiding their theft and the owner is greeted with a torn up steering wheel/dashboard. As long as there's easy, quick money to be made, a thief will do whatever it takes.
Re:I wonder about this by SternisheFan · 2012-10-10 15:58 · Score: 1

(Replying to my own post) I forgot to add that 'bad' mechanics will steal the bag from a customer's car, repack the void left nside of the steering wheel with wadded up newspaper so there's no 'sinking' of the plastic, then sell the bag to the next customer and charge full price for it. Pure "profit". And they'd know how to disable the instument cluster's warning light with noone the wiser.

Sounds like a racket to me by shaitand · 2012-10-10 10:45 · Score: 1

This sounds like automakers wanting to lock in monopolies on the airbag market. This is illegal with every other part in the car, it sounds like the manufacturers want to use FUD to make airbags an exception.

There is nothing about an airbag being made by a third party that automatically makes it less effective than one made by a dealer. Most likely the 'authentic' airbags are made in the same Chinese factories as the knockoffs.

Re:Sounds like a racket to me by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-11 01:44 · Score: 0

Another retard.
"...fail to inflate properly or don't inflate at all."
Re:Sounds like a racket to me by shaitand · 2012-10-11 05:29 · Score: 1

Yes, I noted the rhetoric that tried to equate non-manufacturer airbags with faulty airbags. There is no particular reason third party airbags have to be faulty and this seems to be drumming up support for tighter protections for manufacturer supplied airbags. The government is already urging people to get airbags from the dealer.

The R E A L queston... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 11:13 · Score: 0

is whether these replacement airbags work or not. if they are copies of real ones, why not?

i see no issue of safety, just that they are not "genuine".

seems like they are being attacked for merely being replicas and that, sadly, seems to be a who is not making money from inflated prices question...

Re:The R E A L queston... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 15:57 · Score: 0

The whole point is that they dont work, you dumb fuck.

Re: Shopping at Fakeway by stephanruby · 2012-10-10 11:40 · Score: 1

Ultimately, it's your choice whether you want to deal with a business which has integrity. It's not mine.

I wasn't expecting everyone to agree with my suggestion anyway.

We should have nuked them in the 1950s. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 12:49 · Score: 0

Those godless slanteyed fucks have no morals or ethics.

Eventually the US will realize it is us or them. Both cannot exist
in the long term.

A first strike is by far the best option. Park four or five SSBNs in the Strait of Formosa
and let those dog-eating lowlifes have it.

That's cool, but you got your parties backwards by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 13:01 · Score: 0

That's.cool if you want to.blame politicians, but you've got your parties backwards. HW Bush entered executive orders blocking Chinese companies from selling aircraft components here. Clinton REMOVED restrictions.
Obama was buddy-buddy with his big donors, the Chinese, until it became a political problem as the primary campaigns got underway.

What does Romney have to say?:

"President Obama has spent 43 months failing to confront China's unfair trade practices," said Romney in a statement. "I will not wait until the last months of my presidency to stand up to China, or do so only when votes are at stake. From Day One, I will pursue a comprehensive strategy to confront China's unfair trade practices and ensure a level playing field w

Re:That's cool, but you got your parties backwards by swalve · 2012-10-10 23:52 · Score: 1

What's his plan? Going back to protectionism and tariffs?

Re:The time has come by Trogre · 2012-10-10 13:16 · Score: 1

At worst, those nukes will spray the intended victims with used pinball machine parts.

--
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife

Quel surprise by PacRim+Jim · 2012-10-10 18:50 · Score: 1

China selling fake airbags? Hudathunkit?

Make it not worth their while... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-10 23:24 · Score: 0

First - the headline. Ha ha very funny. Smartass.

But - my question is why tf are the things so expensive in the first place?

If you manufactured and sold them with a less than obscene - or even (oh, the horror) amodest - profit margin, there wouldn't BE any room in the market for knock-offs.

Hypocrite by ThatsNotPudding · 2012-10-11 00:02 · Score: 1

You want Made in the USA? Tell state and federal congress to stop doing everything to drive up the cost of business compared to China and India...

The same states and federal congress that have passed health, safety, workers, and consumers rights that would prevent any of this shit in the US. They had to, to guard against greedy, immoral pricks that worship mamon over people. Remind you of anyone?

Slave Labor rented at a PREMIUM with low quality results is still apparently cheaper than coming back here and paying tons of taxes, be subjected to over regulation and be threatened with union formation.

I guess you get your anti-union wish, as more states (mostly southern) have found their new slave labor: prison inmates. We're starting to see it's no accident why the US has more people imprisoned (usually minorites) than even - take a guess - China.

And how much does an airbag cost? by sirwired · 2012-10-11 00:47 · Score: 1

You know a legit airbag costs more than $80. I know it. The body shop and/or insurance company knows it. It's the "partly the customers fault" for not requesting and going over the full parts record? Does the average consumer receiving body repairs really go over the invoice line by line (especially since insurance is footing the bill)? And even if they do, do they know how much parts are supposed to cost? Do they know that cheap aftermarket airbags can be deadly?

When you see the doctor and he does a test involving a tissue sample, do you request to see the slides after the pathologist is done with them? Do you request the calibration certificate for the cholesterol tester? No you don't, and you also shouldn't have to be going over the body shop's work with a fine-toothed comb.

And yes, any body shop that even offers to cut corners that much in parts procurement is a lousy shop; even if they've told the customer about the cheap parts. Better to educate the customer, and if that fails, simply refuse the job rather than have the death of the customer on their conscience.

Re:Controlled explosion by hoboroadie · 2012-10-11 02:07 · Score: 1

If the bag fails to explode, I consider that more a feature than a bug.
I used to use a 4" racing harness, combine that with a helmet and you could drive like Mister Toad.

--
They feared that it could be used to suppress protest or support unpopular rule.

Re:Sino-Racketeering by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-11 02:10 · Score: 0

Usually when they try to short the pay-off.

Re:PRC by hoboroadie · 2012-10-11 02:17 · Score: 1

Jerry Brown is bringing manufacturing jobs back to the People's Republic of California.
Yay!

--
They feared that it could be used to suppress protest or support unpopular rule.

That's right, make the consumer pay by poofmeisterp · 2012-10-11 04:30 · Score: 1

Satirical comment:

Yes, make the consumers of the vehicles (parts) pay! The lack of teardown, inspection, and verification of the funcationality and authenticity of each part BEFORE their purchase of the item is completely coming out of their pocket.

Gag.

Sector size by sjbe · 2012-10-11 06:44 · Score: 1

Also, dollar value doesn't convey the number of items that are imported. Imagine buying $.01 widgets from China, and $1,000,000,000 luxury cars from all other places. I can imagine that less objects would come from all other places.

Come up with some data or you are just hypothesizing. Even if you are right it is just a guess unless you can back it up. Plus you are forgetting the HUGE amount of stuff that is made domestically. The US has the largest manufacturing sector in the world. According to the UN, the US manufactures about 2.5 times as much stuff as China and accounts for a bit over 20% of the world total. Odds are that most of the stuff you buy was made right here in the USA. China is coming on strong but the notion that "everything is made in China" is demonstrably nonsense.

Re:Sector size by eugene+ts+wong · 2012-10-11 10:39 · Score: 1

My comment wasn't about imports vs. domestic products. I was just saying that dollar value doesn't tell us where the largest number of items or volume of product came from. I am trying to emphasize that the question and answer in discussion are more complex than some believe.
I don't need data to do it. I wasn't hypothesizing or guessing. I was just laying out the scope of the challenge.
I wasn't saying or implying that everything was made in China. Even in my illustrative scenario, luxury cars were made in other places.

--
testing out my trending skills

Wrong question by sjbe · 2012-10-11 06:49 · Score: 1

question is "which country do we import most stuff"
than the answers is China - top of the list at 18% (then Canada @ ~14% and Mexico @ ~12%, Japan @ ~6%
and then drops off rapidly)

The question wasn't which country do we import the most stuff from, the assertion was that "most of what we buy was made in China" which is patent nonsense. The US has the largest manufacturing sector in the world by a wide margin - by some measures over double the output of China. Most of what we buy in the US was also made in the US since only fraction (around 20-30%) of what we manufacture is exported. The notion that everything we buy was made in China is demonstrably false.

When are we going to take China seriously ? by ToddInSF · 2012-10-11 11:03 · Score: 1

Neither candidate has the integrity to do so.

Everyone's been in such a hurry to do business with China and India, nobody is prepared to make certain that standards are followed or that products are safe.

Dead pets from contaminated pet food, putrid, spoiled "Danish" buttercookies made in Ching Chang Chung sold at major drug stores, everybody saw the big profit potential but nobody bothered to do what needed to be done to guarantee safety, and nobody has ant real legal recourse when they're harmed.

Once again, American greed has been exploited to bankrupt the nation, and flood the markets with inferior products, with very little to no government regulation or oversight.

Products that break and war out fast, no real customer service, and a lot of garbage - that's what these Chinese imports have given us.

Enjoy the throw-away global culture built on the cheap labor of low wage overseas slaves, make excuses for the real spoils of American greed and corportocarcy, but don't pretend you don't know or can't see where all this is going to lead.

Re:China BACK to the FUTURE by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-12 04:53 · Score: 0

Young Doc: No wonder this circuit failed. It says "Made in Japan".
Marty McFly: What do you mean, Doc? All the best stuff is made in Japan.
Young Doc: Unbelievable.

(BACK to the FUTURE part III, via IMDB http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0099088/quotes

Slashdot Mirror

Counterfeit Air Bag Racket Blows Up

288 comments