back to article Trump gloats, telcos weep, and China is furious: How things stand following UK's decision to rip out Huawei

The ink has scarcely dried on the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport's speech to the House of Commons that confirmed Huawei would be banned from the UK. The landmark ruling has drastic consequences for the Chinese comms giant. Its second-biggest business unit is carriers, and Huawei has long been involved with the …

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Forcing China into asymmetric warfare with the west would not be a bright move.

        1. TheInstigator

          Any pretext for a pre-emptive nuclear strike is a good one in my opinion ;) *sarcasm*

  1. Roland6 Silver badge

    What about Huawei's 5G Patents...

    Given it has been acknowledged that Huawei owns key 5G patents, I'm sure Huawei will be reviewing the terms of their usage and potentially withdrawing them from the 5G patent pool...

    1. DavCrav Silver badge

      Re: What about Huawei's 5G Patents...

      " I'm sure Huawei will be reviewing the terms of their usage and potentially withdrawing them from the 5G patent pool..."

      Surely you cannot withdraw patents from FRAND after agreeing to it? It would kind of make the whole FRAND thing meaningless.

      1. DevOpsTimothyC Bronze badge

        Re: What about Huawei's 5G Patents...

        Is that then more or less meaningless than what America is doing?

    2. DS999 Silver badge

      Re: What about Huawei's 5G Patents...

      They can't do that, once committed patents cannot be withdrawn from a pool. That would defeat the whole purpose by allowing companies to contribute patents, get their patents used in building a standard, then once the standard was final pull the patents. They could say "we demand 10x what you would have been paying us previously" and you'd have no choice if you wanted to use the 5G standard.

      1. Dave Pickles

        Re: What about Huawei's 5G Patents...

        According to another site, this has already happened.

      2. Roland6 Silver badge

        Re: What about Huawei's 5G Patents...

        >They can't do that, once committed patents cannot be withdrawn from a pool.

        Well... What is a FRAND Patent?

        I suggest Huawei's patents can be argued to be "IP products and services" which would seem to make them fall under the generic "goods and services" covered by the US government's trade restriction regulatons...

        Their usage (to build products as opposed to contribution to Standards development) certainly does not fall under the exception "work with China’s Huawei to develop standards for 5G and other cutting-edge technologies". So looks like another exception is going to have to be put in place - like yesterday - otherwise Huawei can contribute patents to a FRAND pool, but US companies will be left jerking around in the wind when it comes to using them...

  2. karlkarl Silver badge

    My detailed analysis is as follows:

    [Human rights]

    America: Poor

    China: Very Poor

    Russia: Very Poor

    [Criminal]

    America: Yes

    China: Yes

    Russia: Yes

    So if my privacy and security is going to be ripped away from me regardless as I get digitally raped from every angle... Then America might as well be the one doing it (by an admittedly very small margin).

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      So long as this doesn't affect our arms sales to Saudi Arabia I don't see any reason to bring human rights into it

      1. TheInstigator

        Quieten down load - it's OK when the West does it as it's for freedom, truth and democracy - didn't you get the memo ?

  3. alain williams Silver badge

    When politics meets technical decisions

    From the point of view of today's technical assessment this is the wrong decision. This assumes a benign China - us techies don't like to think that people are nasty (with a few exceptions).

    From a much longer political decision of international geopolitics you might get a different answer: depending on how you value human liberties and your view of Chinese political ambitions.

    If our UK politicians have taken a long view I am very pleased at this rare event - irrespective of them being right or wrong. If they are just bending over for Trump - I am not pleased.

    1. ThatOne Silver badge
      Devil

      Re: When politics meets technical decisions

      > politicians have taken a long view

      Come on, that's impossible (no matter the politicians' nationality)...

  4. 45RPM Silver badge

    This is what we voted for. If you voted for Brexit, if you voted for the Tories, even if you didn’t vote Tory but you failed to vote tactically at the last election, this is on you.

    It isn’t just the UK that is populated by pig turd thick doofuses either - if only it was - you can tell a low IQ country by how far to the extremes it votes - although right wing extremism is the particular problem at the moment, and there’s nothing centrist about the Tories.

    I’d apologise for the rant, but I’m bloody furious - and I will be for a while yet. And this isn’t about whether or not ditching Huawei is right or wrong - at this point I hardly care. What matters is our motivation - and that’s demonstrably on the cock.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      You do remember that Blair was Labour, right?

      Whoever people voted for we'd have got this.

      1. mevets Bronze badge

        Not tories - brexit

        I think the first UK:USA trade requirement has been delivered. Isn't independence great.

      2. terrythetech

        No, Blair was New Labour - a whole different kettle of poo, er, fish

  5. USER100

    Must be a bad move

    I was unsure what view to have on this issue until, as so often, I was convinced by listening to Iain Duncan Smith - to believe the opposite of whatever he said.

    1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: Must be a bad move

      "I was convinced by listening to Iain Duncan Smith - to believe the opposite of whatever he said."

      He's very good at that.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Must be a bad move

        He's from a long line of incompetent British so-called leaders.

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Focusing on market solutions....

    What ever happens please just don't let us end up with the US sh*t show that is their internet providers....

    1. Kernel

      Re: Focusing on market solutions....

      Don't worry - that'll be coming soon after your NHS system has been aligned to the US healthcare model.

  7. TheInstigator

    How soon before ...

    Yi, Oppo, OnePlus, DJI, Zhiyun, Xaomi - to name but a few.

    One thing they all have in common is they're Chinese - how long before they're all found to be security threats - I'll take your bets please!

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: How soon before ...

      Think a bit deeper. Are those cheapo phones Critical National Infrastructure? Are they an Availability threat? No.

      1. TheInstigator

        Re: How soon before ...

        Imagine being able to turn all the microphones on at will ... suddenly - yes !

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: How soon before ...

          Your naivety is touching.

          Why do you think intercept evidence can't be used in UK courts?

          https://fullfact.org/law/intercepted-evidence-cant-be-used-court/

          1. TheInstigator

            Re: How soon before ...

            You might not be able to use it in court - but to gain intelligence and an advantage over your adversaries - surely that would be useful right ? Otherwise why would a lot of other 3 letter government agencies invest so much money in SIGINT?

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: How soon before ...

              Of course it's useful.

              But it may well be illegal.

              1. TheInstigator

                Re: How soon before ...

                Oh yes - it's illegal.

                We won't do that then because Western countries never commit crime - we're all for truth, freedom, democracy and justice

                Sorry - you got me there!

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    The Global Times is an offshoot China's Xinhua news agency, which is government-controlled

    The Global Times has no independence from the official position of the Chinese government, and provides English-language official news distribution outside of the PRC. Sadly, very few news sources in mainland China are independent from the government, so take what they say with a grain of salt.

    1. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

      Re: The Global Times is an offshoot China's Xinhua news agency, which is government-controlled

      In Blighty you can find government is controlled by offshoots of a news agency which many believe to be hell-bent on rewarding itself with/as a dynasty.

      It is though a mighty fraught enterprise with all manner of twists and turns to negotiate and appease, methinks. Definitely not an exercise for either the fickle and faint hearted or the intellectually deficient.

    2. DiViDeD Silver badge

      Re: The Global Times is an offshoot China's Xinhua news agency, which is government-controlled

      very few news sources in mainland China are independent

      Unlike, say, the Murdoch Press or CNN. Thank goodness the West has such fine, objective journalism.

  9. Hey Lobotoman! CALL -151!

    I see that Trump just dumped his campaign manager because of falling poll results

    Did he use the "it's not you, it's me" speech?

  10. tcmonkey
    Mushroom

    I’m quite sure that I’ll get downvoted into oblivion for saying this, but I’m going to do it anyway.

    This probably is geopolitical rather than being anything to do with security, but with what the CCP has been doing to its citizens over the last few years, they can get fucked. We have all the justifications we need to hit them hard in the wallet.

    1. Fruit and Nutcase Silver badge
      Alert

      We have all the justifications we need to hit them hard in the wallet.

      Well, Cinia, in the guise of CGN do have us over a barrel with respect to the new nuclear power stations - Hinkley Point C, Sizewell C and Bradwell B. In the case of the latter, the agreement being to deploy CGN's HPR1000 design. As it is, IIRC, the Sizewell C deal gives a premium on the generation tariff.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Over a nuclear barrel...

        there's no need for anyone to have us over a barrel with nuclear power. We've got a nuclear site at Hinckley C and we could put a dozen RR submarine nuclear power plants on it.

        We have to stop letting perfect be the enemy of good.

  11. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

    What pathetic excuses would you like to give for this demented unilateral action ....

    Pompeo goes full retard

    And does the UKGBNI support it? Or are they going to denounce it or just try to ignore it and remain deaf, dumb and blind to it and pretend it is not happening on their watch?

    Over to you, BoJo. Something you can ask Mad Mike when he call on you next week ......... https://www.state.gov/secretary-pompeos-travel-to-the-uk-and-denmark/

    1. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

      Ogres 'R' Us on a Maniacal Mission?

      And if you want to know why Pompeo is calling on tiny Denmark [population 5,790,721] .....

      The most recent action against the Nord Stream 2 pipeline was taken by Washington in December, when it disrupted the construction of the project in Danish waters when it was only some 90 miles short of completion. This month, however, Denmark approved a petition that gives the company building the pipeline a technical workaround to the US sanctions, and the works might restart as early as next month. ...... https://www.rt.com/news/494854-nord-stream-unfair-competition/

      1. TheInstigator

        Re: Ogres 'R' Us on a Maniacal Mission?

        I gotta get me some of that Freedom Gas!

        Hmmm mmm mmm !

  12. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    China is a one-party communist state with an awful record on human rights (Uighurs, Tianamen Square), not to mention a long history of IP theft. It's also in an expansionist mode (South China Sea, Belt & Road) that is likely, sooner or later, to have it butting up against the US and other friendly nations. Having a Chinese-owned company run strategic national infrastructure always seemed like a very risky choice. Some folks claim Huawei is not controlled in any way by the Chinese government, but given the requirements of the National Intelligence Law, that seems like wishful thinking, even if the company wanted to remain impartial. The risk is not just spying, but the ability to disrupt national infrastructure.

    1. Julz Silver badge

      Or...

      USA is a two-party capitalist state with an awful record on human rights (BLM, Capital Punishment, Border Control, Drone Strikes), not to mention a long history of IP theft. It's also in an expansionist mode (Iraq , NATO, Safe Harbor) that is likely, sooner or later, to have it butting up against China and other friendly nations. Having a USA-owned company run strategic national infrastructure always seemed like a very risky choice. Some folks claim CISCO is not controlled in any way by the USA government, but given the requirements of the Patriot Act, that seems like wishful thinking, even if the company wanted to remain impartial. The risk is not just spying, but the ability to disrupt national infrastructure.

    2. TheInstigator

      I've always found the ability to see a situation from different viewpoints a very useful aid to help maintain an objective point of view.

      If you were sitting in the East, what would you say about the West?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Overpaid, oversexed and over here.

        ;)

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Trade and geopolitics

    That's all it boils down to. I don't believe for a moment Huawei would be a threat. However, free trade is good; always consensual; never owed. It is up to China now to decide what China is. On its current path, China is looking like a nation that will mostly sell its tech into Africa and a bunch of allied (mostly poorer) nations, while it continues to pursue its local territorial ambitions and the mass internment (and alleged mass sterilisation) of a section of its population, all under the banner of a socialism with Chinese characteristics that increasingly looks like national socialism. If you disagree with what China is doing, you have two tools available: All out war or the levers of trade and sanctions. I prefer the latter; I worry we'll end up with the former.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Trade and geopolitics

      Indeed.

      A relevant phrase I heard this week: "You never kick anyone towards you".

  14. Potemkine! Silver badge

    A clear message to european countries

    Do whatever possible to develop your own solutions. Don't be dependent either of the US or China or you will pay the price for it.

  15. naive Silver badge

    Being nice is also an option

    The reason for banning them are their suspected ties to the PLA.

    Instead of doubling down on threats like a Mexican drug cartel does, the CCP could have taken steps to take away doubts about the ties between them and Huawei.

    Instead they do nothing in in this sense, threat the rest of the world like they are children, threatening them with a beating if they are not obedient.

    If China wants to be successful in selling tech, they could change their laws, freeing firms of the obligation to cooperate with what the CCP defines as "Chinese security needs", be more transparent and not behave like it is Germany embittered by the Versailles treaty.

    1. TheInstigator

      Re: Being nice is also an option

      This is like Aesops fable.

      Whatever Huawei or China does to dissuade would never be enough. Do you want China to turn round and say "If Huawei finds any crimes being committed against any parties then we allow them not to have to inform us". Do Western companies operate with the same parameters ?

      In the UK, if you go into hospital with a gunshot wound the medics are obligated to inform the police - on the face of it there's no real need for this - but we understand it's because a serious crime has taken place - are you saying because you believe China to be a totalitarian state then subversion is Ok ? Does this mean if someone doesn't believe the Western system is ok then they can do the same thing ?

      Just so that you're aware - in your last paragraph if you replaced all references to China to America the statement would be equally as valid.

      Also - for the record - I don't think one country is better than another - I hate everyone equally.

  16. segillum

    Imputing qualities to others which you yourself possess but cannot or do not wish to own is known to psychoanalysts as 'projection'. Often exhibited by individuals, entities and states alike.

  17. Colonel Mad

    H3C

    What about their stuff, one could re-lable it I suppose, HPE anyone?

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021