Chester,
This is the relevant part of what I wrote at post #27.
Some parts highlighted in
blue and some underlined as well..
How exactly does making public
who did the testing give away your intellectual property?
Likewise the method of testing.
In effect, you are inferring that if your competitors knew
who did your testing they could take their hitches of similar looking design to that tester and he would just 'rubber stamp' them as compliant.
Surely the tester would test any other manufacturers hitch using exactly the same techniques that he used on yours, and charge the same price, after all, that is how such a business makes its income.
Or are you saying that another manufacturer would be stupid enough to forge a 'report', using the name of a fake tester, in order to make their hitch appear compliant? Such a scenario is laughable, and wouldn't survive scrutiny of the first failure.
What you actually own, and spent the $ to obtain the certification for, is the specification of your hitch, and any unique design features, which you are entitled to not disclose.I have highlighted in
red in your post the matters which I totally agree could reasonably be redacted in what they have posted.
Allright i will try to explain; the testing report as well as containing the testing agencies name will also contain steel used inc grade etc, fittings used, construction method used, field testing method used, previsous version trials, CAD or other drawing numbers, patents filed or pending it will also contain the method of test by the agency themselves and also protype testing methods MDC utilised to get the hitch to a point where they were confident to submit it for certification and god knows what else
So what do you think other say overseas manufacturers would do when they find all of this information on a public forum. Especially when they are already probably getting pressure from their OZ distributers to put better designed hitches on thier campers yep you guessed it devise a copy for a fraction of the price and write a joke email to MDC thanking them for doing all the hard work then posting it in the public domain
So yes it would be in MDC best commercial, and intellectual property interests to remove some details off the report.
However, as a prospective customer, I would want to know
who did the testing, which is what you are saying is unreasonable. I would prefer to also know
how they tested it, although arguably that is less important, as it is being certified by an
identified, qualified tester.
Without at least the identity of the tester customers are being asked to take 'on faith' that the original document is legitimate. That might be sufficient if purchasing a heavily regulated product produced by a large publicly listed company with significant assetts behind them - for example car manufacturers. However that is not the case with the camper industry as, with the possible exception of the likes of Jayco, it is just too easy for companies to go 'belly up' and disappear.
This is not in any way directed at MDC, as I would have the same concerns about any other make, given the number of small producers / importers who can, and do, cease production on a regular basis.
