Industrial Espionage: Not Just For China Anymore
The recent arrest of a Ford employee on charges of industrial espionage may have been enough to scuttle Ford’s sale of Volvo to Chinese firm Geely. Or, as Bertel Schmitt reports, perhaps the spy story was just a convenient excuse to get more money out of the deal. But whether as a legitimate concern or strategic fearmongering, industrial espionage is hot right now. The Freep reports three former GM-Daewoo employees have been charged with spycraft, for allegedly transferring “critical GM technology” to Russian automaker tagAZ. The technology in question: engine and component designs for Daewoo’s outgoing (J-200 model) Lacetti, predecessor to the Cruze. And GM claims tagAz’s new C-100 sedan (above) looks a little too similar to the Lacetti in question. “It’s pretty close, if not dead on,” say GM-Daewoo spokesfolks. “The J-200 may not be a new vehicle for a lot of developing countries, but for a lot of emerging markets, it’s a very aspirational vehicle.” And it’s been a best-seller in Russia. TagAZ denies that it stole designs from Daewoo, saying it spent four years and $250m developing the C-100. But it also hired “a number” of former Daewoo engineers, according to GM, which is probably the most legitimate way to steal a good design. But with GM possibly wavering on the Opel deal, will this latest espionage raise doubts about the wisdom of selling Opel to another Russian firm? It probably should.
More by Edward Niedermeyer
Comments
Join the conversation
Not surprising...saves on engineering costs.
I see some parts similar to the Lacetti/Nubira/Optra Front door, A-pillar, windshield, rear door looks very similar to the hatchback version. A bit of the front fender is also similar. Front end looks more to me like a Daewoo Lanos than the Nubira/Optra. Dashboard is different. The GM one looks better. Pic of 3/4 of the car: http://www.podrezali.ru/resources/images/content/2009/07/15/tagaz_vega_c100_1.500x500.jpg Front strut mounts seem to be the same. Boatload of pics from Russian forum http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://club-c100.ru/uploads/tagaz_c100_04.jpg&imgrefurl=http://club-c100.ru/index.php%3Fshowtopic%3D3&usg=__YYSpF_Gbp-oiUlaCLabcYYtT4nc=&h=2400&w=3200&sz=1609&hl=es&start=4&um=1&tbnid=gje3Lj2kPTg0hM:&tbnh=113&tbnw=150&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dtagaz%2Bc100%26hl%3Des%26lr%3D%26rlz%3D1B3GGGL_esVE239VE239%26sa%3DN%26um%3D1
Hiring employees from competing companies and thereby using expertise taken with them is not illegal. Nor is it new. As the resident SAH member (Society of Automotive Historians) around here, I can assure you that the Studebaker V8 developed for the 1951 model year (and built through the 1964 model year) was done by an ex-Cadillac engineer. The then current (1951) Cadillac V8 intake manifold would "coincidentally" bolt right onto the Studebaker V8 of the day, providing for more carburetion than stock. The Packard 120 of 1936 was developed by an ex-Pontiac engineer. The valve timing of the Packard 120 engine was identical to the Pontiac inline eight, something very specific to engine design.... Obviously there have been plenty of other similar situations. At least somebody (i.e. the ex-Daewoo engineers) got some paychecks out of the deal. It's not quite like the Chinese, where they simply just steal stuff. (I know also, that this is not just the Chinese - I'm not that dumb).