# Huawei sued over stealing secrets from T-Mobile



## Zhongtiao1 (Jan 29, 2019)

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/28/business/huawei-charges/index.html

For once a lawsuit is valid


----------



## FAST6191 (Jan 29, 2019)

All that effort and you only allegedly try to steal tmobile stuff?


----------



## Taleweaver (Jan 29, 2019)

Zhongtiao1 said:


> For once a lawsuit is valid


I disagree, mostly. For one, you should quote the entire title and not just what you take of it. That is:

"*US unveils its criminal case against Huawei, alleging China giant stole trade secrets and violated Iran sanctions*"

A strong, two-proned title. It's true that the first part of this apparently exclusively targets T-mobile. The article goes to a long stretch of describing the alleged charges, and reduces huawei's stance to one sentence:

_Earlier this month, the company said in a statement that the disputes with T-Mobile were settled in 2017 "following a jury verdict finding neither damage, unjust enrichment nor willful and malicious conduct for T-Mobile's trade secret claim."_

So...why exactly did this get brought up? In fact: why go over all these allegations but not even mention if this is a second appeal or anything. I mean...if this is true then it deserves some context on that part, and if it is false it definitely deserves pointing out. But for some reason, the writer of the article didn't consider it important to follow-up on that part.

...and that makes me think that this whole T-mobile thing is just a way to raise sympathy. Why? Because the second part is just bullshit. Before the Trump administration, Iran was just another country. Not exactly the best pals with everyone, but just doing their thing. Then the Trump administration came into power and pretty much immediately started acting like the bully in the playground: (cue whining voice) "I don't want to play with Iraq and I hate everyone that plays with him! ". Look...I don't really mind the first part. The US is a grown-up country, so they've got all the right to choose whom to trade with or not. But you're not the boss of everyone else. If countries or companies then chose to DO trade deals with Iran, just let them, okay? This whole "they violated Iran sanctions" make it sound as if the USA got legitimate grounds for it.

Now...the problem is that these two get mixed together. I'll be honest: I have no idea on the importance, the intend or the evidence on the T-mobile spying deal. But throwing in this "oh, yeah...also: you ALSO disliked our stance against Iran" makes the USA subjective. This is probably also the reason why China backs Huawei rather than working with the US justice department (see? This already illustrates the stupidity of these sanctions).


----------



## Captain_N (Jan 29, 2019)

@Taleweaver  You really sticking up for Iran? The people in power are evil. The everyday citizen wises they were gone. They want nukes to wipe one of our greatest allies off the map. Trump does not take their shit. Obama probably liked them as he loved the Muslim brotherhood when they took power in Egypt. Its best to put the hate for trump aside and look at the big picture. I know people personally that are from Iran. Thats where i get my facts from not CNN or foxnews. I get the information right from the people that have came to my country to escape Iran's government.


----------



## chrisrlink (Jan 29, 2019)

one question does china have nukes or you think they'll tell their buddy Kim Jon to say f it and blow us to hell?


----------



## ChibiMofo (Jan 29, 2019)

"Before the Trump administration, Iran was just another country. Not exactly the best pals with everyone, but just doing their thing."


I had to read your comment a second time to ensure I didn't miss any intended irony. Unfortunately irony is not all it lacks, as anyone who has followed the Persian Gulf for a few decades would doubtless tell you.

And let's be crystal clear. Those are *United Nations sanctions *against Iran that the scumbags from China were flaunting, not some silly little US law. Why not go ahead and investigate the nature of how those sanctions came about and were unanimously approved by the UN Security Council (and not the US Dept of Justice) before embarrassing yourself further? And since you don't know me, let me point out that I am far more accustomed to referring to CEOs and executives of AT&T, Apple, Google, et al as scumbags than I am those from further afield.

Note also that I would never in a million years defend the pyramid-scheming, illegal-alien-hiring, serial-sexual-assaulting, fake-charity-organizing, traitor that temporarily occupies the White House (rather than prison cell he has earned many times over), but just wait. You'll see that he can be easily moved to lift sanctions under the right condition$. In fact, if you were paying attention at all last week, you would have seen not only this flexibility displayed regarding a Putin's-mob-controlled aluminium company (those were US-only sanctions related to their stealing our election from us -- something Putin's Puppet couldn't wait to end on behalf of his benefactors), but also a quote from Traitor Trump himself about his willingness to "intervene" in the Huawei case. Since the no one will put him and his degenerate career criminal family on trial for treason, he doubtless feels free to continue to sell his influence to the highest bidder. Huawei can afford his services and Guliani is doubtless working on a a strong denial of a deal that will be followed by a strong defense of the very same deal. Because that's how he rolls.

Have a nice day.


----------



## Taleweaver (Jan 30, 2019)

@Captain_N  and @1MiinMofo : very fair points. I should have said "just another country _*in the region*_", so you're very correct on calling me out on it. I know enough of the region to have my own disagreements there. More so: I knew them before you even replied, so I shouldn't have worded it like that (heck...even the above sounds more like an apology). I wasn't thinking. So...sorry for that part.

Still...I remain of the idea that this is all politics. Saudi Arabia has a bad regime, but the USA happily delivers weapons for them. Israel...same thing. But no: Iran has a bad regime, so nobody can trade with them. And especially not China. THAT is what bothers me: the whole "let's play out how bad they really are because it's convenient for other purposes".

@1MiinMofo 


> And let's be crystal clear. Those are *United Nations sanctions *against Iran that the scumbags from China were flaunting, not some silly little US law. Why not go ahead and investigate the nature of how those sanctions came about and were unanimously approved by the UN Security Council (and not the US Dept of Justice) before embarrassing yourself further? And since you don't know me, let me point out that I am far more accustomed to referring to CEOs and executives of AT&T, Apple, Google, et al as scumbags than I am those from further afield.


Hey...I'll gladly take the risk to embarras myself if it means I'll learn something I don't know. Let's see...

Those unanimously United Nations sanctions...I take it you mean the imposed restriction on Iran on enriching uranium? (resolution 1737). I'm aware of that. I'm also aware that Iran basically said "fuck you!", leading to an...erm...extension, I guess?  (resolution 2231).
The thing is: despite Iran's attitude, there has been no proof that they could still enrich uranium, no matter whether it was meant peacefully (nuclear power plants) or manufacturing of war. That's the part where Donald Trump came in: accusations, accusations and more accusations. Basically the same spiel as W. Bush against Iraq, though without mentioning the buzz-word "weapons of mass destruction". As far as I know (correct me if I'm wrong), that is where the USA broke off from the rest of the UN. They not only made it illegal for their companies to trade with Iran but also threatened with economic repercussions against all other companies doing the same thing.

I admit I can't remember which countries agreed with the USA (just that Belgium certainly didn't). But say you're correct and China agreed to it...then why aren't *they *the ones imposing legal action against huawei?


----------

