Sound like the "public intellectual" type of journalist. Didn't read the whole thing, just commenting on the buying patents and blueprints part.First, is China Railways or CNR paying royalty for the parent or buying the patent? There's a difference. Nowadays many tech company are buying patents as a kind of defence against competitors from sueing them with patent infringements. For example, when Microsoft sued manufacturers for using Android, Google bought patents from IBM and Motorola so it can offer protection against patent suing. Waging patent war against the competitors is usually a symptom of a company that can't compete well against its competitors.
Secondly, regarding the blue print. Everyone knows J-7 is based on the MiG-21. SAC designed J-8I based on the experiences in making J-7, so does SAC own the J-8I intellectual property or the MiG? Then SAC designed J-8II based on J-8I, maybe just by changing the nose, once again does SAC own the intellectual property of J-8II or the MiG?
Thirdly, in the 90s to early 2000, people in China tend to lack confidence in indigenous projects, so it's not surprising that they would turn to import foreign technology given a chance. In early 2000 indigenous projects like J-10, WS-10, Shenzhou etc. were not gauranteed to succeed. However as we know now, with perseverance they do have a fair if not a good chance to succeed. The same thing could happen to indigenous train project if the foreign companies decided not to sell their technology.
