Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by chromas on Thursday January 17 2019, @08:30AM   Printer-friendly

Report: DOJ pursuing criminal charges against Huawei for theft of tech

In the wake of a civil lawsuit by T-Mobile and other telecommunications companies against the Chinese networking and telecommunications company Huawei, the US Department of Justice is reportedly conducting a criminal investigation of the company. According to a Wall Street Journal report, the DOJ is close to filing an indictment against Huawei for theft of trade secrets, including the technology used in a robot developed by T-Mobile to test smartphones.

[...] In the recent civil case, which was originally filed in 2014, a jury in Seattle found that Huawei had stolen robotic technology from a T-Mobile lab. Huawei had used the access it gained by being a handset supplier to obtain copies of the robot's specifications and steal software, parts, and trade secrets from the lab. According to T-Mobile's original filing in the suit, "Huawei initially tried to cover up its actions but ultimately admitted that its employees misappropriated parts and information about T-Mobile's robot in coordination with Huawei R&D so that Huawei could build and improve its own testing robot."


Original Submission

Related Stories

The FBI Conducted a Sting Operation on Huawei During CES 26 comments

FBI reportedly carried out a sting operation on Huawei at a burger joint - While a Bloomberg reporter watched from a nearby gelato stand.

The makers of a super-hard smartphone glass made partially of synthetic diamonds took part in an FBI sting on Huawei, according to a new Bloomberg report. The operation apparently took place at a Prime Burger joint in Vegas during CES last month, while a Businessweek reporter watched from a nearby gelato stand. The embattled Chinese company had ordered samples of the "Miraj Diamond Glass" from US startup Akhan Semiconductor in 2017, only to return them badly damaged. Suspecting Huawei of intellectual property theft, Akhan's founder Adam Khan reportedly contacted the FBI, which drafted him and COO Carl Shurboff to take part in its Huawei investigations.

Email and text communications between the startup and a Huawei engineer were reportedly forwarded to the agency as part of the inquiry. A phone call between Khan, Shurboff and the same Huawei representative was also allegedly tapped on December 10th. Then came the Vegas sting, with the same Huawei staffer in attendance along with her colleague, Jennifer Lo, a senior official with the company in Santa Clara, California. Unbeknown to them, Khan and Shurboff were allegedly taping the entire get-together.

Throughout the meeting, the Huawei reps denied that it had violated US export laws, including provisions of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), which control the export of materials with defense applications -- diamond being one of those materials. They also "claimed ignorance" when it came to the damaged samples.

The FBI also raided a Huawei lab in San Diego. This particular investigation has not resulted in any charges yet.

Also at CNBC.

Related: Arrest of Huawei Executive Causing Discontent Among Chinese Elites
China Arrests Former Canadian Diplomat; Chinese Companies Ban iPhones, Require Huawei Phones
Huawei Under Investigation by DoJ for Theft of T-Mobile Trade Secrets


Original Submission

Germany and the EU Likely to Embrace Huawei, Rebuff the U.S. 91 comments

Despite U.S. Pressure, Germany Refuses To Exclude Huawei's 5G Technology

The Trump administration insists that Chinese firm Huawei, which makes 5G technology, could hand over data to the Chinese government. The U.S. has warned European allies, including Germany, Hungary and Poland, to ban Huawei from its 5G network or risk losing access to intelligence-sharing.

Germany has refused to ban any company, despite pressure from the U.S. Instead, Chancellor Angela Merkel reiterated that her country would instead tighten security rules. "Our approach is not to simply exclude one company or one actor," she told a conference in Berlin on Tuesday, "but rather we have requirements of the competitors for this 5G technology."

Did The U.S. Just Lose Its War With Huawei?

"There are two things I don't believe in," Chancellor Angela Merkel said on Tuesday, referring to Germany's standoff with the United States over Huawei's inclusion in her country's 5G rollout. "First, to discuss these very sensitive security questions publicly, and, second, to exclude a company simply because it's from a certain country."

Europe now seems likely to settle on 'careful and considered' inclusion of Huawei instead of any blanket bans. Chancellor Merkel stressed this week that a joined-up EU response would be "desirable", and Italy and the U.K. are also backing away from Washington's prohibition on Huawei's 5G technology. If they fold, it is likely the broader European Union will follow suit. And if those key European allies can't be carried, what chance Asia-Pacific, Africa, the Middle East?

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 17 2019, @11:35AM (6 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 17 2019, @11:35AM (#787851)

    Reminder that Free Trade only works with "all else equal" between countries. PRC's only comparative advantage lies in abysmal labor laws, brazen contempt for the environment, and the dystopian police state that makes this all possible. Oh, and blatant technological theft.

    Soylentils may not be keen on "intellectual property," but the term theft applies very well here. It's destructive, because it's distortionary: resouces are siphoned away from innovative companies to those whose only talent lies in making cheap copies. In the long run, innovation will stagnate and only copy-making technology and supply chains will advance.

    tl;dr: fuck China

    • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 17 2019, @02:45PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 17 2019, @02:45PM (#787888)

      for all the patented technology they stole in order to spur on America's own Industrial Revolution?

      Because hint: American was flaunting IP laws back when the Chinese were still toiling under a paper tiger Emperor under the thumb of European powers.

      • (Score: 2, Insightful) by pTamok on Thursday January 17 2019, @08:02PM

        by pTamok (3042) on Thursday January 17 2019, @08:02PM (#788009)

        Re:Should America pay restitution to the British then...
        ...for all the patented technology they stole in order to spur on America's own Industrial Revolution?
        Because hint: American was flaunting IP laws back when the Chinese were still toiling under a paper tiger Emperor under the thumb of European powers

        That should be flouting, not flaunting.

        Grammarist: flout vs. flaunt [grammarist.com]
        Oxford Dictionaries:‘Flaunt’ or ‘flout’? [oxforddictionaries.com]
        Merriam-Webster: 'Flaunt' vs. 'Flout'. Is it wrong to confuse these words? [merriam-webster.com]
        English Grammar:Flaunt vs. Flout [englishgrammar.org]

        I have changed my spots, as I used to be pretty much a prescriptivist [wikipedia.org]. These days, I understand a descriptive [wikipedia.org] approach to English usage is more practical (Jacob Kaplan-Moss:Descriptivists and Prescriptivists [jacobian.org]. That said, I feel that a pragmatic or utilitarian approach to use of language is to ensure that your reader or listener has the best possible chance of understanding the meaning of what you are trying to convey. This means that, while language does develop in often unpredictable ways, it is helpful to maintain some usages to avoid confusion. While some people do use 'flaunt' to mean 'flout', the reader or listener can sometimes be led astray by the ambiguity, so I would recommend they are used 'correctly'.

        Alternatively, ignore the prescriptivists, flout convention, and flaunt your apparent ignorance.

        «Disobey all rules, including this one.»

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 17 2019, @03:16PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 17 2019, @03:16PM (#787895)

      what?

      they took it for free. that sort of trade has been proven to work; the problem is that they were caught.

      all of those places businesses outsource to in order to save money are experiencing similar problems... it won't ruin them today, but the executives will be retired by the time it happens. "they got theirs", and shareholder value is enriched during the siphoning, so nothing is expected to change.

      that wall for mexico won't stop this. maybe it's not supposed to and instead is supposed to distract from the real issues? make china pay for a firewall! they already know how how to make a good one; consider that these accused people are always local to the problem.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 17 2019, @03:47PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 17 2019, @03:47PM (#787901)

      tl;dr: fuck China

      Fuck America.... oh wait, that's happening already! There is even a race of who's a bigger idiot these days, America with Trump or UK with their Brexit disaster.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 17 2019, @05:19PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 17 2019, @05:19PM (#787944)

      and the dystopian police state that makes this all possible

      At least on that front, the US is keeping up.

    • (Score: 1) by pTamok on Thursday January 17 2019, @08:12PM

      by pTamok (3042) on Thursday January 17 2019, @08:12PM (#788015)

      PRC's only comparative advantage lies in abysmal labor laws, brazen contempt for the environment, and the dystopian police state that makes this all possible. Oh, and blatant technological theft.

      Hmm. Lets see now.

      PRC's only comparative advantage lies in

      • abysmal labor laws,
      • brazen contempt for the environment, and
      • the dystopian police state that makes this all possible. Oh, and
      • blatant technological theft.

      I guess you'll break out the comfy chair soon. [mit.edu]

(1)