Ironically the irony is not even ironic anymore..
Every actor is just playing its own scripted part now ...
Huawei is suing Uncle Sam to overturn a ban on its communications hardware from US federal government computer networks. The Chinese networking gear manufacturer claims its banishment is unconstitutional because it was unfairly singled out without a fair trial, and wants the decision reversed. Specifically, on Wednesday this …
The Constitution only applies to American citizens and by that default to American companies. I give it a snowball's chance in hell but then again, lately we've been having some weird stuff going on here in the States such as companies being allowed rights as "people".
Yes, but the government does have broad powers to exclude companies from unfriendly nations. That's part of the reason why the U.S. didn't buy much oil/gas from the Soviet Union during the 70s and 80s, when the U.S. was importing half or more of its oil.
I wonder if there is a possibility of a defamation suit though, considering that the U.S. government is leveling accusations against Huawei, so far without evidence, which are detrimental to its public reputation and brand. The government didn't really defame eastern bloc companies during the Cold War, it just said "We don't want no damn commies selling lots of stuff in the U.S."
Well, yes. The US government does have broad powers to exclude foreign companies. But it has to follow a bunch of rules when it does so. It appears to me that Huawei is arguing that the government has failed to play by the rules. They may well be right.
That doesn't mean that Huawei, even if they prevail in court, is actually going to get their gear into US government IT systems. It would likely just mean that the US government might have to do a better job of making their case(s) against Huawei (and ZTE).
Yes, but the government can and will do things like review and shut down mergers and acquisitions on national security grounds. Simply because they don't trust the country the acquiring party is from. And that is well within the law.
We'll see how the courts rule, but if the government rolls out (justly or unjustly) the "We have evidence against Huawei, but it is classified", then the courts will probably give the government leeway. And there is the issue (unproven as yet) that Huawei is trying to undermine U.S. sanctions against Iran.
Of course, the real issue is probably this trade spat with China, and if that is resolved then a lot of the concerns about Huawei may mysteriously abate. I don't mind the government playing hardball against the Chinese in this manner, but I do get kind of leery when they skirt the law to do so.
This post has been deleted by its author
That's where the patent trolls go to file suit.
As this is the Federal Government they are going after, a change of venue will be the second motion put before the court.
The first will be a motion to dismiss which will probably fail but it has to be done.
Then the second motion will most likely be granted. East Texas knows that the Feds are a different kettle of fish from say... Apple or IBM or...
Good luck trying to sue them in DC...
That Great Wall of China is just a couple of hundred years old. Some inner walls are a bit older, but that Great Wall itself is pretty young, it predates the USA by about 300 years. The major problem however isn't that it isn't finished, but that the invaders came right through it (legally, using gates as merchants) in a couple of places where they couldn't get around.
I thought it was primarily designed to keep people in rather than out? I guess I am demonstrating my ignorance and half-remembered nonsense here. It's true that it's not thousands of years old, though. I cannot now correct the timescale on my joke unfortunately, so it will have to stand forever as a monument to my lack of both humour and history.
Well, first of all, it's not one wall. There are various walls, built at various times by various emperors. Some were linked, others weren't, some related to older borders before China was properly China as we know it. Chinas wall building goes back to about 650BC. What we see in the photos and travelogues are the more recent Ming dynasty walls which someone quite rightly points out are not much older than the USA as a nation.
What about any other country? Huawei now thinks they can sue just about any country who doesn't want their kit?
Oooo, what an interesting precedent this would set. The German Government doesn't want to buy/use the Bedazzler? Sue them!
"What about any other country? Huawei now thinks they can sue just about any country who doesn't want their kit?"
Isn't this what the US want's (and already has) in it's trade deals? Companies can sue governments for not buying their stuff. Want to buy local rather than import? You'd better be able to prove what you buy is cheaper, better, whatever than importing from the US or the US company will sue you. I believe Canada already has this issue.
The US has been selectively ignoring the Constitution for so long that teaching what it really is becoming a lost art. Law says X? Oh that's fine, we will just ignore that. Constitution says Y? Oh, well that is because it was written way back when they had horses and stuff; no need to apply that here.
As to if the US is constitutionally barred from these actions is a mute point.
In the US Federal, State and Tribal governments have sovereign immunity which basically means that you won't get far suing the government as it can tell you that it farts in you general direction *and* call you a silly wiper of other peoples bottoms.
It's an idea we got from the English. Really.
with its unconstitutional practices with regard to Huawei ; it seems extremely unlikely that the company - and its US lawyers - have any illusions about the judicial outcome of their suit. The point, I suggest, is to make it even more evident for all interested - and possibly to interest more people, in the US and elsewhere in this matter - that when the US government chooses to do so, it ignores all the rules under which it is supposed to operate....
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021