Except for a handful of shoddy LED's, everything else I've imported from China has been of impeccable quality. Recently I purchased 200 1.6mH 4x4" coils made to specification, at a cost of 40 cents each, the workmanship was incredible. I also imported 2 brand new 125khz RFID readers, with enclosures, for $10 each - they do the same job as the phidget readers, and how much are they? Same with ethernet cams, 50 bucks each and functionally flawless.
So I don't think there's a legitimate argument regarding the quality of electronics components originating in China. Once upon a long time ago, there were many examples of bad workmanship originating in China, but, things there have changed, a lot. So much so, I'd be prepared to wager that the quality of a copy, given the right instructions, would be difficult spotting any considerable differences.
I struggle though, to understand why someone would want to manufacture their own. When you factor in shipping, the time it takes to organize the purchase, possible communications issues resulting in unforeseen misunderstandings, the anticipated savings might not completely transpire.
I've wondered for a while, why there aren't more 3rd party add-on boards specifically designed for the Arduino. Like, relay boards, LED multiplexers, input multiplexers, so that a few of the solutions people seek in the Arduino, are available off-the-shelf, packaged with software and examples.
I mean, how many people buy an Arduino, then try for months trying to get a LED to blink? Perhaps not that extreme, but if you read through the forum, I've noticed quite a number of people looking for ways to control large numbers of LED's - surely that's screaming out for an off-the-shelf solution, so why not get that made in China?
Legally, I also think the good people here would be seriously challenged enforcing the trademark. Recently, an acquaintance and I were discussing a (not very exciting) new technology, he suggested that, unless we had piles of millions of dollars, the best way to protect the technology was to ensure it was available at the lowest possible price and mass distributed before anyone had the chance to think about copying it. He suggested, that was a means of making the millions needed, to then afford to protect the technology. Otherwise, a company with deeper pockets, would simply beat you to death until your funds had run out.
And the other question remains, is the Trademark legally enforceable? It could take 5 years in a court to get a ruling on just that one point. And by then, how many millions has someone else made?
Anyway, if it's a case of opportunities to profit, I think there's plenty of others besides building copies. But, I would be interested in understanding why it is an issue, over the savings of a few dollars?
And as for making copies, I suggest anyone with that kind of determination better have their sights set on making millions in order to defend against any kind litigation - who really knows how deep the pockets are of those defending the trademark.