Huawei Technologies is taking the US government to court over Section 889 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which was announced in August 2018.
That Act prevents US government agencies from purchasing any technology from Chinese vendors Huawei or ZTE, or even entering into a contract with any companies that use those vendors' technology. Huawei argues that Section 889 is "unconstitutional," stated the Chinese vendor's rotating chairman Guo Ping in a press conference broadcast via multiple social media platforms late Wednesday US time/early Thursday China Standard Time.
The move had been rumored earlier this week.
Huawei is filing a lawsuit against the US government in the federal court in the Eastern District of Texas near Plano, where Huawei has its North American headquarters. Ping said that Huawei had been "left with no choice" but to challenge the US government in court, as there was no evidence of any security threat coming from Huawei. Ping added that the US government has "misled the public" by creating the perception that Huawei is a security threat. "The US has acted as judge, jury and executioner" in its recent efforts to discredit Huawei, he said.
LIVE NOW - Huawei Special Press Conference https://t.co/ubdqOWsNCr
— Huawei Facts (@HuaweiFacts) March 7, 2019
Ping added that even worse than the NDAA, which Huawei describes as an "abuse of the lawmaking process," are the efforts by the US to block Huawei from 5G markets in other countries: He questioned whether the US, having provided no evidence of any security threats, is "afraid" that other countries will catch up with the US in terms of 5G.
Huawei trotted out some senior staff members to provide supporting statements, but the big news today is that Huawei is hitting back at the US and is doing so in America's backyard.
Never a dull moment, right?
— Ray Le Maistre, Editor-in-Chief, Light Reading
I worked on a product that was excluded from the PRC for a year to pass tests for a spec that:
1- No Chinese vendor had to meet; and
2 - There were no switches in China deployed in production with the complementary spec
The entire purpose was to give time for the product to be cloned (and it was). So, I don't see having free and open trade practices as a requirement. They are not in reverse. If we were to have symmetrical dealings, the PRC would be screaming (Hey here US company take the Huawei products and copy them and sell them at 50% of list...no R&D required).
seven