Some of Chinese cars makers have been accused of copying designs of other companies.^[23]

BYD

A BYD coupé (left) an_d a Mercedes-Benz CLK (right).

Some BYD cars may look similar to those of other bran_ds including Lexus,^[24] Toyota,^[25] Honda,^[26] Mercedes Benz,^[27] an_d Porsche.^[28] For example, the BYD S8 bears similarity to the Mercedes CLK from the front, an_d the Renault Megane CC or third generation Chrysler Sebring convertible from the rear.^[29]

An anonymous staff member at Honda claimed that the BYD F3 was "a known copy" of the Toyota Corolla (with Honda Fit design cues).^[30] Another model too, the BYD F1, has been described by an industry observer as "a clear copy" - this one of the Toyota Aygo.^[31]

Domestic dealerships have been known to take advantage of this an_d replace the badging of BYD vehicles with those of other car manufacturers, including Toyota.^[30] Micheal Austin, vice president of BYD America, has acknowledged the issue saying that the practices done by dealers (which are franchised) has made BYD "uncomfortable".^[30] Even the US government has critiqued BYDs practices, with a WikiLeaked document from the US Consul-General to Guangzhou (Brian Goldbeck) referring to BYDs practice of copying in a document entitled "BYD seeks to Build Your Dreams -- based on Someone Elses Designs".^[30]

Chery

The Chery QQ (left) an_d Daewoo Matiz (right).

In June, 2003, General Motors, a U.S. company, sued Chery, accusing the Chinese manufacturer of copying the first generation Daewoo Matiz (developed by GM Korea) with the design for the Chery QQ.^[32] General Motors then went on to accuse Chery of using a Matiz in a crash test for the Chery QQ.^[32]

GM executives claimed design duplication,^[33] which may extend to interchangeable parts,^[34] an_d GM China Group stated the two vehicles, "shared remarkably identical body structure, exterior design, interior design an_d key components."^[33]

After mediation attempts failed, GM Daewoo brought a case against Chery in a Shanghai court, but by 2005 jurisdiction had been moved^[34] to the Beijing No.1 Intermediate Peoples Court.^[35]

Around that time Chinese state officials, including a vice-minister of commerce an_d a vice-director of the State Intellectual Property Office, publicly supported Chery.^[35] It was suggested that GM may have not patented its technology.^[35] In late 2005 the lawsuit was settled.^[32]

Great Wall Motor

The Great Wall Peri (left) an_d Fiat Pan_da (right).

Fiat company has claimed that a Great Wall A-segment car, the Peri (Jing Ling in China), is a copy of its 2nd-generation Fiat Pan_da.^[36]

A 2008 Italian Turin court ruling substantiated the claim stating that the Great Wall Peri, “doesn’t look lik_e a different car but is a [Fiat] Pan_da with a different front end.”^[37]

A copyright infringement case in China did not see a similar outcome.^{[clarification needed][citation needed]}

Other Great Wall models may resemble those of other automakers: The Great Wall Florid, may look similar to a Toyota ist an_d some older Great Wall Hover models may look lik_e Isuzu Axioms, etc.^{[citation needed]}

 Shuanghuan

The Shuanghuan Noble (left) an_d Smart ForTwo (right).

The Shuanghuan Noble has caused numerous controversies, with Mercedes-Benz even filing a lawsuit against Shuanghuan because of the alleged similarities with the Smart Fortwo.^[38] Mercedes-Benz also persuaded the Italian court to prohibit the car from being exhibited at the Bologna Motor Show,^{[citation needed]} but the Shuanghuan Noble car was put on display anyway.^[39]

In May 2009 a Greek judge ruled against Daimler an_d cleared the car allowing sales to begin in Greece. The judge answering to Daimlers deman_d to ban the Chinese vehicle from entering the Greek market said that “The impression the Noble makes on a third an_d informed party by its visual appearance is different to the one that is made to the same person by the Smart . . . It is commonly accepted that the decision over buying a new car cannot be based only on the exterior characteristics but many other technical specifications such as the power of the engine, fuel consumption, trim specification, retail price an_d dealers’ network.”^[40]

The ruling states that the latter party’s doings “cannot possibly misguide the public” as the German company claimed in its legal request. The judge noted the salient fact that “the plaintiff is no longer selling the specific generation of the Smart which claims to have been copied, but a different vehicle, with much different characteristics.”

Threats to disclose industry secrets

The Wall Street Journal reported that the government of China will be forcing foreign carmakers to disclose their electric vehicle technology secrets before the vehicles are allowed to be sold in China. The current Chinese automotive policy states that a foreign carmaker must form a joint-venture with a Chinese carmaker if the former plans to sell its electric vehicles there, with the latter holding 51% stakes while the former is only allowed to hold 49% stakes.

Due to the threat by the Chinese government, Toyota postponed the launch of the current-generation Prius until they have been confirmed about the plan.^[41]