Produced by | Car Talk In-Depth Group
Editor | Zhao Miaolin
Editor in charge | Yuan Guiyuan
Where there is business competition, always stay away Don't start "face-bumping" disputes.
Although I have only been in the industry for more than a year, I am already used to the "face-colliding" incidents of cars' appearance. No, recently, two more self-owned brand "big brothers" have been involved in the "face-colliding scandal".
At the end of February, shortly after Geely Automobile released its mid-to-high-end Galaxy series products and debuted the L7, a lawyer's letter commissioned by Changan Automobile and sent to Geely Automobile by Chongqing Baijun Law Firm stated that The Galaxy series models recently released by Geely are suspected of plagiarizing Changan Automobile's concept cars and mass-produced cars, seriously infringing Changan Automobile's intellectual property rights, and Geely is required to immediately stop the infringement.
However, in the face of the accusation, Geely Automobile also immediately issued a "Statement" stating that the "Galaxy Light" is Geely's original design and there is no plagiarism or infringement of other people's intellectual property rights. We will take action against false statements. legal means.
As for the "reply", as of the publication of this article, Changan Automobile has not made an official response, and the "fight" between the two companies has reached the intermission stage.
"Colliding faces" has become the norm
Just looking at the comparison pictures circulating on the Internet, most people subconsciously think that Geely's Galaxy prototype and Changan Deep Blue SL03 and UNI series models There are indeed some similarities.
However, some relevant people pointed out that this set of comparison pictures was deliberately intended to mislead the public.
Non-professionals judge plagiarism mainly based on whether the patterns and shapes that occupy the visual focus are similar. The comparison chart particularly emphasizes this point through color blocks, allowing the audience to visually feel the car model. There are similarities between.
In fact, designers pay more attention to the posture, surface relationship, morphological language and the connection between various elements of the car than the shape and pattern level of the car design. In the design process, Only designers know how to think, it is difficult for the public to judge.
It is worth mentioning that there is an important connection between Geely Galaxy series models and Changan UNI models: designer Chen Zheng.
Chen Zheng is the current main design person in charge of Geely's "Galaxy Light" and joined Geely Automobile in March 2022.
Before that, he had a 20-year career at Changan Automobile, serving as deputy general manager of design of Changan European Design Center, executive vice president of Changan Automobile Styling Design Institute, Changan Automobile He holds positions such as global design director of the group, and is responsible for classic models such as Changan CS75 PLUS and UNI-T.
As the first Chinese vice president of global automotive design among mainstream car companies, Chen Zheng ended the history of only foreigners serving as vice presidents of design for Chinese independent car brands. He led the design of many mass-produced models. The model is still selling well today.
For Chang'an, Chen Zheng's resignation was tantamount to the loss of a general. Therefore, some people suggested that Changan's "attack" on Geely may be to anger its rivals to recruit people, and the newly designed Galaxy series and Changan UNI series are similar in positioning and product sequence, giving rise to the idea that the results were "plagiarized".
However, turnover of technical personnel and senior management often occurs in the automobile industry. It would be too arbitrary to attribute this alone as the reason for the "fight" between Changan and Geely.
Whether the similarity between the two models is directly related to Chen Zheng’s job change remains to be examined. As for whether it constitutes infringement, it depends on whether the intellectual property rights of the original design belong to Chen Zheng himself or Changan Company.
In fact, it is not once or twice that car brands have "come into conflict" because of appearance design. The most representative one is the appearance dispute between Jaguar Land Rover and Jiangling Holdings that has lasted for many years.
In 2016, Jaguar Land Rover accused Jiangling Holdings of plagiarizing the appearance of the Landwind X7 model. In 2019, the court ruled that five model designs of the Landwind X7 directly copied the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque and required Jiangling to immediately stop selling the relevant models. Published Relevant statement and payment of compensation of 1.5 million yuan to Jaguar Land Rover.
Previously, Geely was also the “accuser” in the “plagiarism scandal”. Because part of the design of the WM EX5 model was suspected of plagiarizing the Geely Vision SUV model, WM's 4 Plus subsidiary was sued, and set a record for the highest amount of claims in an intellectual property dispute in China. But now he has become the "defendant". I wonder how Geely's mood has changed?
However, only a small number of cases win, and it is the normal outcome for cases involving disputes over similar designs to be settled.
For example, Guangben, which once held a CR-V model design patent with a 10-year protection period, lost the lawsuit when it sued Shuanghuan Noble S-RV for appearance infringement; previously, two unlisted models of Zotye Motors spyware The photos were exposed and were said to be highly similar to the Porsche Macan model, but there was no follow-up.
Based on past "face-colliding" incidents, how to better improve the conditions for determining design patent infringement is a key task to maintain the fairness of commercial competition in the automobile market and prevent "unfair competition."
At the same time, we have to admit that in the era of electrification and intelligence, car design is falling into a "homogenization" dilemma.
The Dilemma of "Homogeneity" in Design
In ancient times, Kong Yiji refuted the theft of books: "Can the things of scholars be called stealing?" Now he is dealing with the same designer The two products I own are similar, so can the design inspiration be counted as plagiarism?
As for Changan and Geely, compared to "plagiarism", I prefer that the similarity in product design is due to the inheritance of the designer's consistent style.
Generally, in the design industry, mature designers will form their own unique design style to distinguish their own designs from those of others.
Even though sometimes people use the word "variable" to describe a certain designer's design style, similarities can always be found in the differences. This is why some people can easily tell Karl Lagerfeld apart. His works, from clothing fashion to interior design, even if he does not use the classic black and white color scheme, you can still find the iconic cool luxury elegance in his works.
The same goes for car design. Chen Zheng resigned from Changan and went to Geely. Although his position has changed, the design style he has developed over a long period of time is difficult to change.
Some people think that as a person with a relatively sensitive identity, Geely’s first work should actually be more restrained and should not reveal too much personal design style. I have no comment on this statement, but I can understand the eagerness to achieve something among the "three things new officials take office".
What’s interesting is that when the Changan UNI series was unveiled, some people pointed out that the UNI-V “collided” with the Audi A7. In subsequent publicity, some people jokingly called it the “replacement version of the A7”, but No plagiarism disputes occurred.
Nowadays, looking at the entire automobile market, excluding the situation of "collision" with designers, whenever a new car is exposed, it will inevitably be said to be "colliding in the face", although it is not known how much "popularity" publicity elements exist in it. , but it has become an established fact that the current car design is becoming more and more "homogeneous".
At the same time last year, when the official announcement of the Ideal L9 was officially released, Li Pengcheng, the vice president of Xpeng Motors, released a comparison chart of the Xpeng G9 and the Ideal L9 on Weibo and joked: The two designers Was there a meeting?
Compared with traditional car brands, new forces appear to be more inclusive in terms of appearance "collision", perhaps because the new forces have unanimously acquiesced in homogeneous development from the beginning.
In the era of fuel vehicles, in addition to the different styles of designers, different regional brands also have different understandings of vehicle technology, architecture and vehicle needs, so the external aesthetics presented by the products are also different. same.
Strong style differences make it difficult for consumers to confuse French cars, Japanese cars and American cars, including Chinese brands that have been said to have developed from "plagiarism". A recognizable local "national trend" aesthetic.
In the era of electrification, the architecture, functions and even manufacturing technologies of cars have become highly similar, and the exterior shapes of these cars designed to present the characteristics of electric technology have also become homogeneous.
Using dialectical thinking to explain, it is the relationship between content and form. Content determines form, and form is subordinate to content and changes as the content changes. In the past, the vehicle manufacturing technology and connotation of fuel vehicles were more complex, so they could present more diverse appearance designs. Nowadays, the vehicle manufacturing technology of electric vehicles tends to be single, and the appearance of their products has also become homogeneous.
On the other hand, the homogeneous development of car design also stems from car brands’ surrender to the market’s “mainstream” aesthetics.
The popularity of clothing and fashion is different every year. The popular styles of car design in different eras naturally also vary. When a certain pattern or element becomes a "hot item", adhering to the "popularity is not the same" trend. With the idea that something will go wrong, car companies will most likely follow suit and apply it to the design of their own products.
For example, "hidden door handles" were changes made by designers in the past in order to pursue a smooth body to express the design concept, but now they have become one of the elements that highlight the sense of technology.
Rather than spending a lot of time and money on trial and error, car companies are more willing to choose the style that is most acceptable to the group corresponding to the product. In this scenario, the designers’ personal style presentation is also Subsequently, when one brand, two brands or even all brands do this, homogeneous design will occur.
Of course, it is not ruled out that car companies are trying to "reduce costs", such as Ideal.
As we all know, new power brands have always been "losing money on each sale". In order to reduce costs and increase efficiency, they use the "matryoshka" model to reproduce popular models, which can avoid considerable risks. Although they are ridiculed “Only one car was built in eight years,” but consumers still paid for it. However, when "matryoshka dolls" become a popular model, the homogeneous development of automobile design will also go to the extreme.
The automobile industry is experiencing "big changes unseen in a century", which is both a blessing and a misfortune. Fortunately, we have more unknown imaginations about the form of future cars; unfortunately, when car-making technology tends to be simple and single, we have to face it and become more and more complex. At present, we are deeply trapped in the homogeneous development trend. Dilemma.
Che Tanjun’s Observation
Some people say that car design is an art that goes back and forth between aesthetics and needs. I agree. The original intention of the invention of automobiles was just to meet the needs of human beings for transportation. It is the existence of designers that allows humans to have an additional travel experience while possessing transportation tools.
It took a hundred years for fuel vehicles to become homogeneous, but it only took ten years for electric vehicles to become homogeneous.
It is undeniable that in the context of industry changes, more human travel needs are being met. However, as it becomes easier and easier to build cars, car companies should break through the shackles and give their designs more So many wild imaginations.
Back to Changan and Geely, while the audience is still paying attention to "who copied whom", the two brands have exchanged public relations and have successfully attracted public attention to the Galaxy series and UNI series. The product has already had the effect of free publicity for the two. Rather than fighting for a bloody battle, a truce after getting an advantage may be the outcome that the two like to see. After all, in an era of serious "homogenization", serious , you lose.
Confrontation is the fate of homogeneity, and is homogeneity the fate of electric development? It is difficult to reach a conclusion on this issue. In the next ten to twenty years, it may be difficult for electric vehicles to get rid of homogeneous development, but major events in the world must be united for a long time, and they must be divided for a long time. When the cycle of differentiation and homogeneity is broken, homogeneity will no longer exist. It's fate.
*The pictures in this article come from the Internet
This article comes from Chetanhui, the author of Yichehao. The copyright belongs to the author. Please contact the author for any form of reprinting. The content only represents the author's opinion and has nothing to do with Bitauto