Huawei Sues the US Government

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.

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

brooks7 3/7/2019 | 2:42:23 PM
Re: Well, its not dull but going nowhere @mrblobby,

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).

mrblobby 3/7/2019 | 1:54:43 PM
Re: Well, its not dull but going nowhere Let me add that it is a matter of public record that Huawei has taken money from the government of the PRC - they are major suppliers to all of the Chinese carriers (which are state-owned). It is also a matter of public record that many Huawei employees are members of the communist party. Chinese law requires that there be a communist party committee within every Chinese company. Please read the excellent (and beautifully laid out) article at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-sh/Huawei As an employee of a Huawei competitor it would suit me for the US government (or anyone else) to come up with evidence of actual Huawei collaboration with Chinese security services outside China. I have seen credible allegations of theft of intellectual property, but not of collaboration with covert intelligence gathering or anything of that nature.
mrblobby 3/7/2019 | 1:40:06 PM
Re: Well, its not dull but going nowhere It is impossible for Huawei to prove a negative. It is impossible for anyone to prove a negative.

The US government knows this. Huawei knows that the US government knows this. Everybody knows that the US government knows this. Therefore, if the US government goes down this path Huawei will credibly be able to claim that the US government has unreasonable expectations of them.

In the courts the principle of "innocent until proven guilty" applies - it should also apply to lawmaking.

Not that I'm a great fan of Huawei mind you - I work for one of their competitors. But this nonsense is causing the the industry to be complacent. Huawei is a formidable competitor, due in large part to their freedom from the shackles of the stock market. Other industries should watch out - the same thing could happen there.
brooks7 3/6/2019 | 10:14:10 PM
Well, its not dull but going nowhere  

Huawei thinks that by saying that it has no intent is good enough.

I think the US Gov will ask for 3 conditions:

- Huawei must show that it has never received any money from the government of the PRC

- No employees of Huawei are members of the CCP

- Huawei has no discussions with the MSS


Sign In