They are all imported devices from abroad; is it necessary to keep the technology confidential?

It is precisely because it is foreign technology that more measures for technical confidentiality should be taken. Foreign technologies involve foreign patents, and Chinese people should show respect for them, which reflects the quality of Chinese people. Domestic technology is also advancing at a rapid pace these days, and confidentiality is necessary; it is a sign of respect for technology as well as for people.

If patent intellectual property protection is involved, confidentiality is necessary, but the exchange does not need to cover the scope of property rights protection. In fact, the key issue is that company leaders are afraid that as technology advances, their own competitiveness will decline. As a result, companies remain closed off and avoid active exchanges, which slows down technological progress. It’s the foreigners who benefit from this; it won’t take long before they have to import from abroad those \"advanced technologies\" that have already been phased out elsewhere! It’s time to wake up! At this time, industry associations should play their proper role by encouraging mutual exchange of knowledge, joint development, and collective progress – this is the right attitude for people in this country.

This problem exists in different technologies, but currently many devices of this type were designed by a foreign company; they can be considered to be copy designs, using the same technology, so there is no violation of foreign patents.

I don’t think there’s any need for that; since we’re both Chinese, why go through the trouble? I mean, by exchanging knowledge with each other, developing together, and making progress together, is it possible to surpass foreign countries

Core technologies are not kept secret by anyone; it’s impossible to keep them hidden. However, after introducing and absorbing these technologies, each company made many improvements based on its actual operational experience, and this is also part of what is kept confidential. In fact, within the chemical industry, knowledge spreads easily; keeping things secret is of little use. By gaining experience, problems can always be solved. It’s better to keep exchanging ideas and sharing what one knows with others, as this way there will be fewer detours and progress will be faster. Only then can it more quickly be subject to international competition.

Our own design and manufacturing capabilities are limited; it would be foolish to remain closed off internally and keep secrets that don’t need to be kept secret. In foreign countries, so-called technical patent protection relies on mutual understanding in order to determine whether there is infringement; only then can one avoid using such elements in the technologies developed themselves, rather than by simply keeping information hidden. Of course, there are also exceptions

Of course, the technologies that one spends a lot of money to acquire are not so easy to share. For example, if you buy software at a high cost, would you be willing to let others use it for free?

In reality, it’s often the case that you’re buying a legitimate copy of WINXP, and I’m also buying a legitimate copy; what’s wrong with sharing usage experiences? Many functions are already available in the software – it’s just that you haven’t noticed them yet.

Think about it: once, those thirteen large fertilizer companies were one entity, learning from each other, helping one another, supporting one another – those days are truly nostalgic.

As discussed in “The Path of Plagiarism in Ammonia Synthesis...”, 40 years ago we imported advanced equipment and technologies. Subsequent research was carried out to gradually implement localization, but now the scale has increased slightly while the technology lags behind that of others; low-energy-consuming options still have to be imported. Against this backdrop, continuing to talk about intellectual property rights only treats us as low-end users or as test grounds for technologies and equipment. When can we reach the level of core technologies?

What Workinging says makes some sense; respecting intellectual property rights is certainly important. However, just as with our strategy during the WTO accession negotiations, if we are completely constrained by foreign parties’ so-called intellectual property rules, we will be severely restricted and remain behind forever. Because we have too little say in defining intellectual property. Everything might be attributed to patents or something similar.

Can we learn from each other’s technologies abroad? Would that help our peers save some money?

For this reason, it is necessary to protect the intellectual property rights of technicians; otherwise, there would be no difference between going to school and not going.

It also involves certain aspects related to ISO9001; it’s likely that it’s not just about technical confidentiality!!! Hehe...

Because our sense of confidentiality is not strong, when introducing foreign technology, many foreign companies send people to provide on-site guidance, but they still refuse to reveal the key technologies.

I believe communication is necessary; technology resides in the minds of technicians. With the flow of talent, how can secrets be kept? Especially in areas where technological improvements have been successful, in order to raise the overall level of China’s fertilizer industry, we should strongly advocate for mutual exchange – the era of staying closed off no longer exists.:lol

A major reason why domestic technologies fail to keep up is the inability to maintain technical secrecy, which often prevents technology development companies from surviving. The development of DVDs is an example: companies invested heavily in such development, only for their technology to be stolen, leading to their rapid collapse. Meanwhile, manufacturers used that stolen technology to produce large quantities of products and earn huge profits, which is why few companies are willing to invest heavily in technological development these days. It’s fine to be envious of others’ advanced technology, but we shouldn’t steal it; instead, we should increase our investment in technology to catch up as soon as possible. These days, in many cases, foreign companies are reluctant to introduce advanced technologies to the Chinese market out of fear of technology leakage; as a direct result, domestic technology remains decades behind that of foreign countries

In the United States, for example, a large number of industry associations have been established; their purpose is to gather technical expertise, standardize practices, and exclude outsiders, such as AISI, ASTM, ASME, AMS, API, AWS, SAE, MIL, etc. He sets standards for the same field – is it possible to work without communication? Another example is the DVD industry: several giants come together to establish their own standards, rejecting Chinese standards, and forcing us to use their standards for production in order to sell the products domestically; in effect, this constitutes a monopoly. Of course, the topic itself isn’t like that. In China, for example, ten manufacturers all pay a KNOW HOW fee to purchase the same type of equipment, and the fee charged by the foreign party does not decrease as production increases. Logically, the foreign party should provide the same technical content. During the process of absorbing and integrating these ideas, shouldn’t different experiences be shared? Why keep them secret? :lol :lol :lol (too wordy)

These days, manufacturers generally make their technologies available to users, it just depends on whether one has the ability to learn them. In the large fertilizer industry, there is a concern regarding talent turnover; that’s why companies like Hualu Hengsheng, Weihe, and Huaihua have turned into chemical training schools. Naturally, those managers become more cautious as a result. Our project is still in the planning stage, and we have hired some people from Dongnitrogen, Hualu Hengsheng, and Jinling. In today’s market economy, the key lies in whether managers can retain their staff – after working hard all year round for such low pay, it’s likely that we too will end up becoming a chemical training school in the future.

I think we still need to pay attention to confidentiality issues; after all, it’s a market economy!