Re: Just testing Google search engine. Got plenty of juicy hits.
Yes. I remember the article.
A beautiful collection of yet more accusations and heavily skewed in the reporting too but then again it's the Wall Street Journal.
I'll accept that though as you'll find equally skewed articles on the other side.
It's enough to write a documentary or film about for sure but in spite of all the bluster there is not much at all by way of actual proof.
Time and time again the line is 'so and so declined to comment', 'so and so alleges this or that'. Yet in spite of the US's best efforts (including re-opening some of those previously settled civil cases) there is really little to grab.
Nothing even?
The article spells out that Huawei does not stand alone in being accused and that everyone wants access to what everyone else has, yet when the subject of secure rooms pops up, and Huawei says it's to prevent spying not engage in it, it just completely fails to mention that EVERY company with sufficient resources has the exact same rooms in their installations.
It drags out the Tappy case and mentions the nearly $5m settlement but completely fails to reveal why it was awarded.
Idem Cisco. No actual balance in the reporting.
The list goes on.
Let me be clear. I am in no doubt that Huawei walked the fine line of what may or may not be ethical back in the day.
I can assure you it has the equipment of rivals in its labs. Is it being reverse engineered? I have no doubt l!
Do you think Nokia does not have Ericsson and Huawei gear in their installations? Are they not doing the same?
Wolf culture? Of course. Both externally and internally. No different to early Apple (to give one example) pushing employees for results.
In the early days it was dog-eat-dog in the ICT industry. Competition was intense.
Books have been written about Huawei's corporate culture.
Is the tone often war-like or pushing for 'glory'! You bet. If you can't understand that cultural angle though, I suggest you read up on that.
Does money talk? Once again, yes! But it talks even more in the US. Was there any mention of that in the piece? Not a jot.
Enticing employees from rival companies? Of course. If someone from a rival is laying off staff, you can bet competitors will be waiting to pick out top talent. Why do you think Apple is in San Diego? How many Qualcomm staff that have just been given marching orders will end up at Apple or even Huawei (provided they are not US citizens. LOL).
This is how things work. Most of Nokia's image research scientists are working for Huawei.
I am definitely not going to unpick all the allegations because every case is different and none of them have actually supported the main claim against Huawei anyway.
If you actually dig down into each accusation and wipe off the WSJ perspective, you will very likely find a little bit of everything (disgruntled former employees/competitors, mistakes, rogue employees, external companies etc.) and no doubt, among all the stories, some will even have a solid base, but with such a massive company operating in 170 countries, that is to be expected.
With so much supposed disregard for other people's ideas or IP, it does make you wonder how things like Polar coding were not only not misappropriated but developed with the full support of the man behind the idea.
What's going on with that?
Why the blazes would Huawei not just rip the man off and be done with it. He was hardly in a position to fight Huawei.
So, when you are done reading that WSJ piece it should be clear to anyone (neutral) that it set out its stall to present a picture that was tuned solely to the aggrieved. There was very little balance on show. But you knew that anyway.
What was/is happening while all of that is going on?
Why has Huawei consistently spent billions each year on R&D and brought new ideas and technologies to market before others?
Are you seriously suggesting that it was all stolen?
Please get serious for a moment.
The wolf culture is still there. The accusations will not stop and it is very, very likely that the vast majority of them will originate in the US.
Times have changed though (for everyone) and there is more of a modern day vibe to everything as demonstrated by Huawei's recent patent cross licencing deals with Ericsson, Samsung and various patent pools etc. Huawei is also making strides in making its own IP available for licencing.
I can't remember the date of the video but it wasn't that long ago when Huawei revealed as an example that is was involved in less IP related legal disputes than Apple (and by a huge margin).
That will never end. Disputes are the name of the game.
However, most importantly in this discussion. Did you actually prove your point here? The answer to that is 'no' and even if each and every one of those accusations (collected over decades) were true, what percentage of Huawei's output and achievements would it actually represent?
That is a hugely important question and the answer will astound you.
Just how important was Tappy to Huawei? It makes for scandalous reading but what actually happened there? Was reality far more mundane than the actual accusation?