Live data from Hacker News

The U.S. is charging Huawei with racketeering

techcrunch.com

101–110 of 332 posts

Re: The U.S. is charging Huawei with racketeering

#101

> The DoJ alleges that Huawei and a number of its affiliates used confidential agreements with American companies over the past two decades to access the trade secrets of those companies, only to then misappropriate that intellectual property and use it to fund Huawei’s business. These American companies thought they could build their products for a fraction of the price in China and increase margins. They didn't sto…

It’s not just China that does this. This is a proven path for developing economies, that still have a labor price advantage. It’s the reason “Made in Germany” exists as a label, forced by the brits to mark “inferior goods” that turned out to be cheaper and better. Just like China now...

Re: The U.S. is charging Huawei with racketeering

#102
post #76
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's hard to feel too sorry for these companies. It's not exactly a secret that this is how China operates and has operated for a very long time. I see this as a win-win. These U.S. companies tried to take shortcuts by outsourcing to China and they got burned. China engaged in all sorts of unethical and illegal behavior in the process and will (hopefully) get burned.

I see this as a win-win, too, but in a different way. Early on, the US companies cut their costs: good for them, and likely their customers. In the long term, China developed the expertise needed to contribute to the development of advanced technologies: good for them, and for humanity's aggregate progress. There's a lot of acrimony over how to divide the surplus, but this shouldn't overshadow the technological and e…

Its wonderful that we can now reap the harvest of pervasive surveillance for pennies.

Re: The U.S. is charging Huawei with racketeering

#103
Huawei clearly is on parity with western technology. The evidence is here:

https://www.eetasia.com/news/article/Integrated-5G-Chips-Unv...

And in particular, with its 5G modem:

http://www.hisilicon.com/en/Products/ProductList/Balong

Some news about this:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-09-09/huawei-an...

And also for the base stations:

https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/huawei-s-5g-ran-port...

Re: The U.S. is charging Huawei with racketeering

#104

> The DoJ alleges that Huawei and a number of its affiliates used confidential agreements with American companies over the past two decades to access the trade secrets of those companies, only to then misappropriate that intellectual property and use it to fund Huawei’s business. These American companies thought they could build their products for a fraction of the price in China and increase margins. They didn't sto…

I don’t feel sorry for them because those companies are engaged in something else that’s intrinsically bad.

But that doesn’t diminish my criticism for China and their culpability in egregious acts. Our greatest sin is ever working with any authoritarian country but their sin is they fundamentally deny what it means to be a human being.

Re: The U.S. is charging Huawei with racketeering

#105
post #76
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's hard to feel too sorry for these companies. It's not exactly a secret that this is how China operates and has operated for a very long time. I see this as a win-win. These U.S. companies tried to take shortcuts by outsourcing to China and they got burned. China engaged in all sorts of unethical and illegal behavior in the process and will (hopefully) get burned.

I see this as a win-win, too, but in a different way. Early on, the US companies cut their costs: good for them, and likely their customers. In the long term, China developed the expertise needed to contribute to the development of advanced technologies: good for them, and for humanity's aggregate progress. There's a lot of acrimony over how to divide the surplus, but this shouldn't overshadow the technological and e…

I love the fact that the PEOPLE of China have been able to benefit economically from this. However, less than 9% of China's population are members of the CCP. The other 91% of China's people are locked out of any form of government representation.

This is a recipe for tyranny, and the elites of the CCP have oppressed the good citizens of China by developing tech for suppression of speech, identification and targeting of dissent, etc. Even worse, they have begun exporting this technology to other autocracies.

I say this as somebody who has no illusions about the corrupt nature of the US government. However, the US government doesn't have nearly the power over its citizens that the CCP has. Just wanted to clarify that I'm not pretending I live in a perfect democracy. Just empathizing with the Chinese people, and wishing they had more say over their situation than they do now.

Re: The U.S. is charging Huawei with racketeering

#106

> The DoJ alleges that Huawei and a number of its affiliates used confidential agreements with American companies over the past two decades to access the trade secrets of those companies, only to then misappropriate that intellectual property and use it to fund Huawei’s business. These American companies thought they could build their products for a fraction of the price in China and increase margins. They didn't sto…

> It's hard to feel too sorry for these companies. It's not exactly a secret that this is how China operates You mean every developing nation? Just look at U.S. industrial espionage in Europe during the 18th-19th century when it was developing. Pretending this is somehow how China specifically operates is disingenuous.

Nobody claimed that China is the only one to steal. Brits stole tea trees from China. Americans stole textile manufacturing from Brits.

Perhaps if those Yankees could have pointed at the Brits stealing tea trees, then the Brits would have been struck with a sense of self-realization of their own hypocrisy, and let the Yanks make off with those machine designs with no hassle?

Re: The U.S. is charging Huawei with racketeering

#107
post #76
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's hard to feel too sorry for these companies. It's not exactly a secret that this is how China operates and has operated for a very long time. I see this as a win-win. These U.S. companies tried to take shortcuts by outsourcing to China and they got burned. China engaged in all sorts of unethical and illegal behavior in the process and will (hopefully) get burned.

I see this as a win-win, too, but in a different way. Early on, the US companies cut their costs: good for them, and likely their customers. In the long term, China developed the expertise needed to contribute to the development of advanced technologies: good for them, and for humanity's aggregate progress. There's a lot of acrimony over how to divide the surplus, but this shouldn't overshadow the technological and e…

> good for them, and for humanity's aggregate progress.

I don't think social credit and proof that democracy isn't necessary for profit is good for humanity's progress.

Re: The U.S. is charging Huawei with racketeering

#108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a consumer, that may be good in the short term. But innovation isn’t free. In a world where people can just copy other people’s hard work with impunity, what incentive is there to invest in innovation?

This is a tiring trope. It’s like how the music industry kept saying that people would no longer sing and make songs, because piracy would prevent them from doing so. As if there was no money to be made, and money was the only point of singing. As if piracy ever stopped people from singing for the past 10,000 years. Well, artists do make money from songs, by having concerts. They are selling the service and the exper…

One can take a balanced position on this without going to either extreme. American companies have certainly abused the patent and copyright system by allowing patents to last for far too long and cover too much. Likewise copyrights have been applied for too long time periods.

Yet I don't think the solution to this problem is to abandoned both systems completely. Rather copyright period should be shortened, and patents should cover less and last for a shorter time.

Right now the system is not setup to support innovation and creation but rather to act as cash cow for big corporations.

Re: The U.S. is charging Huawei with racketeering

#109
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

in a lot of cases the low-cost competitors are not only lower cost but have more features and/or better performance. They side-step a lot of the planned obsolescence and intentional feature scarcity US companies have become so dependent on to avoid meaningful R&D. Its hard not to see a lot of them as sort of a Robin Hood. On topic though, Most of the pot-banging from Washington is at the behest of AT&T and other US c…

” They side-step a lot of the planned obsolescence and intentional feature scarcity US companies have become so dependent on to avoid meaningful R&D. ” They also “side-step” the capital and years of research required to come up with the products. Why invest in R&D when you can invest in corporate espionage for a fraction of the cost?

If they didn't invest in research, how were they first to market with 5G solutions?

Re: The U.S. is charging Huawei with racketeering

#110
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the perception that people commonly have of IP protection in China is out-of-date by several years. From what I've read, the level of IP enforcement has increased dramatically since about 2014, to the point where there are more IP cases heard in Chinese courts now than in any other country. Likewise, more patents are now filed in China each year than in any other country. It's also not as if local companies a…

China protecting their own IP does not preclude China conducting industrial espionage in other countries; for that matter, the US NSA conducts industrial espionage in other countries for the benefit of US companies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECHELON

Parent comment asks when China will start respecting IP. I addressed that.
Post reply on HN