Maryland woman charged with smuggling sensitive technology

[Gary Mortimer]

Picked this story up on DIYdrones and then looked for a newspaper report...

http://www.dcexaminer.com/local/crime/Maryland-woman-charged-with-smuggling-sensitive-technology_02_17-39689487.html

Humm

[GliderGuideMan]

But Canadian officials questioned why automated controls would be used for model airplanes since manually flying the airplane is the whole point of the radio control flying hobby.

Interesting assumption!!!! maybe we are all (on this forum) secretly working for foreign powers up to no good :D

Cheers
DaveB...>

[keithskye]

Off topic, but do either of you ever get down to the south coast (Brighton) for a bit of soaring on the slopes there? I have an office and a flat there, and I'm always amazed by how few people fly R/C gliders there, at least compared to the numbers you see in similar places here in the US.

Keith McLellan

[gkamysz]

Aren't there several Chinese autopilots being developed?

[Qnzkrew]

im pretty sure that if the chinese government wanted to create and autopilot they would have no problem doing it.

[small_rcer]

The Micropilot product is an export controlled item for several reasons. An autopilot under the Wasserman ( spelling? ) Agreement specifically calls out a few criteria.

1) Gyros on the autopilot.
2) Accelerometers
3) More than 300 km range

that apply to the Micropilot. In fact the implication is that it is NOT an autopilot unless those items are present.

The MicroPilot product range contains some or all of the features deeming it to be a controlled item. If the intent was re-export from the US after importing it, it would be without question a violation of the International rules on arms proliferation.

AttoPilot on the other hand with the less than 300 km range from launch, no gyros and no accelerometers, would be excluded as I read the Canadian export controls regulations.

The Canadian regulations are written to comply with the export regulations as agreed to in the Wasserman Agreement. Most Western nations and many non-aligned nations have signed on to this agreement. The US and Canada are two signatories to the agreement.

Jim H

[Gary Mortimer]

Its Brighton Keith!!

We are all inland near proper real ale pubs.

[Gary Mortimer]

http://www.djacobsonlaw.com/2009/02/maryland-woman-accused-of-exporting.html

[Jack Crossfire]

The autopilots Chinese secretly smuggle to Americans are way better than the autopilouts Americans secretly smuggle to Chinese.

[Connexxion]

http://www.dji-innovations.com/en/

Sounds like BS to me.

[Mick Molloy]

How can the USA control what a Canadian company sells and to whom???

[Quandumphone]

How can the USA control what a Canadian company sells and to whom???

In this case, it looks like the items were imported to the U.S. first and then illegally exported to China. This after a warning was issued. This is fishy as hell and good job to whoever reported the initial transaction in Canada. Hopefully they'll get to the bottom of it but I have my doubts the truth will ever be known. This is a pretty interesting story.

[bmw330i]

Wow, what a catch, I feel so much safer knowing the country that owns our countries national debt and soon our next generations debt has been denied such dangerous technology.
lol, (Jack Crossfire), my sediments exactly. Maybe soon the Chinese will hire americans for their cheap labor when all the jobs are gone in a few years.

[patrickegan]

Itar

[Real Ira]

This is silly.
If you can buy it here the Chinese had it first.

[gwh]

Itar
So far the articles look more like EAR, ECCN 9A012.

[Quandumphone]

China's First

I don't think that's very true at all. A notable amount of their technology, especially military, is copied or bought from other countries. Look at their military hardware for example. Much of it is Soviet or cloned Soviet hardware. Their first manned space flight was in 2003 with a capsule that looks suspiciously like the Soyuz design. That's pretty far behind the U.S. What about all the Chinese people that come right here to the U.S. to further their college studies, much of that in technology based universities. China has it's stronger points too but they definately weren't first in many key areas.

Anyway, this all begs the question: If the Chinese autopilot is so great, why does one person feel the need to go to Canada to get 20 copies of someone elses design to send to China after being warned not to do that? Why didn't the "flying club" in China just order them direct from Canada and skip the U.S. altogether? I'm guessing that would have violated export agreements too.

I think a likely benign scenario is that one or more copies would have fallen into the hands of the type of people that copy the construction and sell it cheaply in China. I understand that kind of thing happens a lot. Hopefully that's the worst of it. It's very possible that this is nothing but don't you think a mere hobbyist would have been more careful after being warned?

[Connexxion]

China's First
I don't think that's very true at all. A notable amount of their technology, especially military, is copied or bought from other countries.



A lot of todays rocketscience of both the US and Russia is a copy of the Germans.So who's copying who?

The german Werner von Braun comes to my mind. ;)

[Quandumphone]

No argument there and I hope I'm not coming accross as a nation basher. I'm pretty open minded. At that time, though, they were provided better opportunities to innovate and expand on their ideas by bringing them to the U.S. This is an interesting thing because we also may have issues that could restrict our ability to innovate and advance technology because of possible increased regulation.

I know that's going off topic a bit but I'm hoping that people are open to the idea that there are others that may be interested in what we do for purposes we don't intend. This could range from harmful use to technology theft. Then again, maybe there's 20 people in China that are haplessly flailing about the sky because they don't have their autopilots.

[spitfiremk9]

Itar
What T F? you are ITAR? you look like ITAR? you feel like ITAR? you want to be ITAR???? ahh, I know, your keyboard went down after the first four letters!!!

[Mick Molloy]

Ear

[drex]

well the fact that they were warned is proof enough.

it is a complete system, and i agree that it should be on the list.

[keithskye]

Its Brighton Keith!!

We are all inland near proper real ale pubs.


Ah, Gary, but can you fly from a nice, grass covered, 1,000' hill only steps away from a huge pub and inn like Devil's Dyke with lots of open car park? And they serve up great food, too!

Keith

[keithskye]

No argument there and I hope I'm not coming accross as a nation basher. I'm pretty open minded. At that time, though, they were provided better opportunities to innovate and expand on their ideas by bringing them to the U.S. This is an interesting thing because we also may have issues that could restrict our ability to innovate and advance technology because of possible increased regulation.

I know that's going off topic a bit but I'm hoping that people are open to the idea that there are others that may be interested in what we do for purposes we don't intend. This could range from harmful use to technology theft. Then again, maybe there's 20 people in China that are haplessly flailing about the sky because they don't have their autopilots.

Have any of you thought of the idea that there might be some who lurk here on these forums, soaking up all the technical info they can get in order to better employ it for purposes that are definitely not hobby-related (can you say "weapon")? I for one am against things like "open-source" autopilots, etc. Anything that allows terrorists to develop even the simplest of systems that could be used to carry a payload autonomously from point A to point B is not good. The payload can be very small (bio-weapons are very lethal in small doses), and navigation does not have to be very accurate...

[bmw330i]

...I can only imagine those evil doers working on that model airplane for years to deliver that terrible stuff in small quantities ... tuning the IR sensors, reading the postings for days on end...cleverly waiting, patiently...just like your Tom Clancy Novels tell you how it's done...

Meanwhile in the real world they pack up a truck and drive whatever it is there...or mail it in the post. Why in the world would anyone in the real world go to such trouble when in 10min you could get 100x the effect the same way they do it now? Why wouldn't they simply learn to fly (taking a lot less time than learning to fly a UAV properly) and simply again, use the Human Autopilot.

My God...Keep dreaming, this is not a terrorist incubator. Terrorists want to cause terror and scare people. Nothing about a small model airplane causes terror (outside your dreams)...if anyone is lurking here to cause trouble it's people like you trying to cause it.

[patrickegan]

Those on the other side are also users of this technology. :)

[Gary Mortimer]

Its all those flipping people with big umbrellas that are such a pain there Keith

http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=633638

I think the main thing with this "export" is that there are clear rules and they were broken.

There are many horrid things to do to other people in simple ways sadly.

[bmw330i]

Those on the other side are also users of this technology. :)
With all due respect give me an real data on this. An credible article where Terrorists are using UAV/MAV technologies or were discovered with them. The Chinese are not Terrorists so articles about someone not following Export Compliance is not terrorist activity.
There is a list of countries that harbor terrorists and people that you are not supposed to sell to. A hit on that list is ok with me. An article with info about someone or a country on that list buying and using model aircraft for acts of terror. Produce that I'll gladly change my views.

[bmw330i]

Terrorists are cowards and take the quick route. If there is an easier way for them to do their evil they will. The idea they would come here, and try and learn to fly anything discussed on here is absurd. Sort of like the DEA watching this board thinking drug cartels are going to fly drugs across the boarder with UAV. To me that's more likely...so how many DEA agents are on this thread? ... Drug Cartels learning to fly UAV? Just raise your hands...

It's the payload vs amount of time and effort that makes it absurd not that you think it. In life it's not a bad idea to run things past a filter so we don't go chasing fantasy.

I should be clear, if you really want to believe that I'm ok with it. If you want to believe those people are there and sneaking about plotting that masterful swarm of killer MAVs that fly in like honeybees...that's fine. You are more than welcome to your opinions. I'm just personally against trying to spread that sickness (paranoia is a sickness) here in these forums where everyone is just trying to learn a hobby and educate themselves and others...for fun.

[bmw330i]

There are many horrid things to do to other people in simple ways sadly.

In fairness to Gary Mortimer's thread this is about rules and someone voilated them. For this I agree that the person named in the article was wrong and there should be consequences if it is found (we are all entitled to a fair trial) they broke the laws.

I am for rules and laws...and follow my countries laws. I have never been arrested ever in my life and suppose the worst offense on my record is a speeding ticket in my 20s. I am all for keeping the bad guys out.

My comments about the paranoia was not aimed at complaining about existing laws. Just with paranoid visions going wild is when learning ends and new laws to suit the paranoid are drafted...then forums like this go away and the only people who can legally own any of this is the Govt. Best not to start down that slippery slope IMHO. I am not calling anyone in particular paranoid just saying if you let thoughts go too far without passing them through the fantasy filter it can lead to extreme thoughts and paranoia.

[patrickegan]

http://www.ynet.co.il/english/articles/0,7340,L-3536025,00.html
http://www.espionageinfo.com/Ul-Vo/Unmanned-Aerial-Vehicles-UAVs.html
http://www.menewsline.com/page-1073-Hamas-Said-To-Be-Developing-Attac.aspx

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4244646.stm

and that is just the public stuff...

and don't laugh at the last one as our military is buying a version painted in air superiority gray

[bmw330i]

Hamas definitely counts. That sucks. Well I can't deny that. Thank you for educating me.

[Gary Mortimer]

There are and will be many innocent and practical uses of MAV's

It is just beholdant on us as operators to police ourselves well.

If we don't other people will police the activity and yes the simple way is to just say no.

I don't want this thread to dissolve into the mud slinging that normally happens though!!

Lets all together decide how we would like to operate and try and stick to it.

I personally think the RCAPA concepts point in the right direction.

We should be part of the solution, not the problem.

Rant ends!!!!

Oh no it starts again, its the flipping FPV crowd with their dodgy videos on youtube that will close us down faster in my mind.

Standing by for flames.

Balsa blah blah, dope, shed, expensive radios, smelly diesel engines, things ain't what they used to be, endless blue skies, serve your apprenticeship blah blah moan moan, oldest man on earth, moan, groan.

I do keep forgetting that if I were 16 again (obviously only recently not) I would be working every hour I could in the local grocery store to buy equipment that I could see the ground from. It would have been my number one buy.

Just try and do no harm people !

[small_rcer]

Patrick always brings interesting items to this thread. And yes I did laugh out loud when I read that the Pakistan army had captured a 'drone'. Which was a $100.00 poorly performing model airplane. And then when I read that the story was from 2005, I realized that at the time LiPos were not widely used and this was probably a toy used to entertain someone.

The fact that the US military may be using toys to train operators of R/C based UAVs just shows the problem of regulating dual-use articles.

Today's news is reporting that North Korea is trying to launch a satellite. The Chinese government has put astronauts in space. They have the technology! This UAV stuff is widely available all over the world.

But rules are rules. And certain technology maybe should be restricted for export. Certainly the very highest tech should be restricted.

However the expressed idea elsewhere that open source autopilots should be restricted and ideas in these threads that could, to use a 2nd world war term, 'give comfort to the enemy', should be banned, is totally unacceptable. The Paparazzi open source autopilot is years old. Many US universities have done published research on and participated in public competitions of autonomously guided vehicles. We as hobbyists have benefited from these efforts. We will continue to do so.

Also regardless of what side you are on in a dispute, each side feels obligated to use whatever means they have to 'protect' themselves. So the idea that a legitimate or not legitimate government wants to use the same technology should not be surprising.

I am always amazed when a country complains when an opponent uses the same tactics it does. So if Hamas, the democratically elected government, tries to use the same tools as the Israeli government, there is an outcry. Patrick's links tell of the Israeli's using UAvs way back when, and then the other articles seem to complain when the same tool is used by Israel's opponent.

So maybe making it all open source will level the 'playing' field. Isn't that what MAD (mutual assured destruction) was all about?

Just stirring the pot 8-))

Jim H

[patrickegan]

The poorly performing model with the right autopilot is in demand. While some of this may sound ridiculous some of it is deadly serious, let’s be smart and exercise due diligence when it comes to the toys… :)

[bmw330i]

Good points around. I'm getting more open minded on both sides.

I fact for sure is our trillion dollar debt is in large part owned by the Chinese Investors buying it. If they decided to not invest or sell it we're screwed. It would take down America faster than any cold war.

China is our ally financially but not militarily. We Americans have to accept they are the new Democracy and superpower industrially. I think the rules will flex and adapt in the coming years around China due to our special relationship with them.

This article is about a Woman breaking the rules against selling this technology to the Chinese and on that topic I think it's a rule that maybe reconsidered and modified in the coming years as we are forced to keep the owners of our national debt happy. I would be surprised if this case goes to trial vs just going nowhere and ending quietly. It's a new world order these days things are changing fast.

-BMW

[Gary Mortimer]

Yes it will be interesting to see where it goes trial wise.

Anybody here live nearby to go and watch ;-)

[EddieHaskell]

The poorly performing model with the right autopilot is in demand. While some of this may sound ridiculous some of it is deadly serious, let’s be smart and exercise due diligence when it comes to the toys… :)

I used to be an exporter for a major aerospace company (before I got laid off).
US Commerce has been classifing all non-military UAV autopilots 9A012
It says: [if it has] "an autonomous flight control and navigation capability" its a UAV and requires an export license. It doesn't say anything about rate sensors, you guys that think you are going to get around the export regs by claiming an IR attitude control are asking for trouble. Patrick is right, the Feds take these regulations seriously and so should you.

[bmw330i]

..Patrick is right, the Feds take these regulations seriously and so should you.
As far as I know this is perfectly legal in the USA still unless you're suggesting otherwise.

[tekrunner]

Hamas definitely counts. That sucks. Well I can't deny that. Thank you for educating me.


Yes but when you consider that Israel originally created Hamas to counter Arafat it complicates the matter.

[EddieHaskell]

As far as I know this is perfectly legal in the USA still unless you're suggesting otherwise.
Yes, of course export regulations only apply to autopilots shipped outside the US. I should mention that 9A012 lists NS (national securiity) as the reason for the control. Canada is the only country that is not affected by NS so you could export to Canada without a license (the way I read it). You can look these regs up and read them for yourself.
http://www.access.gpo.gov/bis/ear/ear_data.html
Country chart
Catagory 9

[Gary Mortimer]

How I wonder will the authorities make sure those legal units stay in the USA??

Will tech logs be required for operators??

ie a very accurate record of every flight for the FAA??

[dmgoedde]

you guys that think you are going to get around the export regs by claiming an IR attitude control are asking for trouble. Patrick is right, the Feds take these regulations seriously and so should you.I'm not one of those guys that think IR attitude sensing somehow gets around export rules.

[keithskye]

Terrorists are cowards and take the quick route. If there is an easier way for them to do their evil they will. The idea they would come here, and try and learn to fly anything discussed on here is absurd. Sort of like the DEA watching this board thinking drug cartels are going to fly drugs across the boarder with UAV. To me that's more likely...so how many DEA agents are on this thread? ... Drug Cartels learning to fly UAV? Just raise your hands...

It's the payload vs amount of time and effort that makes it absurd not that you think it. In life it's not a bad idea to run things past a filter so we don't go chasing fantasy.

I should be clear, if you really want to believe that I'm ok with it. If you want to believe those people are there and sneaking about plotting that masterful swarm of killer MAVs that fly in like honeybees...that's fine. You are more than welcome to your opinions. I'm just personally against trying to spread that sickness (paranoia is a sickness) here in these forums where everyone is just trying to learn a hobby and educate themselves and others...for fun.

Hmmm... maybe using the word "terrorist" was not appropriate, but believe me when I say that there really are those that pay attention to what is said in forums such as these - people who definitely do not have our best interests and safety at heart, but rather the opposite. I live in the USA, work in the UK and France, and travel the world extensively, and have met, listened to and been amazed at what some people have revealed in casual conversation. Also, I am privy to sources of information that I cannot openly share, and just as my wife has reminded me (recently retired US Army intelligence analyst), our country in particular, and many other "friendly" countries as well, deal with and stop many attempts at breaching national security with the intent to harm the general population on almost a daily basis. The general public is not made aware of any of this, and for good reason - to minimize or prevent general paranoia and panic within our society.

The imagination and ingenuity of the people making these attempts is pretty scary. Until recently, one of my job responsibilities included serving as my operation's ground and air security coordinator and in such capacity I was then required to undergo certain training and given access to "security-sensitive" information, which really opened my eyes! I'm not trying to spread paranoia here, but if you think that you cannot do serious damage with just the simplest and cheapest of "toy" UAVs that can be bought practically RTF, or any other R/C model, then it is you that are sadly mistaken.

There is a "silent" battle that goes on every day between the security forces of "friendly" countries and those that would do them harm, and our country is the biggest target there is, for many different reasons. And all that I know of this I did NOT get from a Tom Clancy novel! Talk to any agent that does serious field work for CBP, TSA, HD, NSA, CIA or the FBI, and if they could speak openly to you, you would not be so quick to dismiss some of the concerns that have been voiced here and in other similar forums.

A final comment regarding the export of technology: its not the country that you initially export a potentially lethal or security-sensitive technology to that is the issue, it is the countries that in turn can import that technology from the country you first exported it to. China may not be a direct threat, but they trade with and sell to a lot of other countries who are definitely not pro-American, etc. Those countries, while maybe not able to field the numbers we have here, definitely have enough people that are bright enough to take advantage of whatever technology they can get their hands on, in ways that you and I might never think of.

I, for one, do not intend to make that any easier for them. Having said that, I also do not want the incredible freedom that we enjoy and take for granted here in the USA to be adversely impacted. Self regulation, restraint and real common sense is all that is required. Myself and everyone involved in private, business aviation and general aviation as a whole in this country, are fighting to keep our freedom to fly wherever and whenever, while at the same time trying to address the very real concerns regarding security. Its a situation that is not going to go away, and is only going to get more serious as time goes on. Every time ours or any other country has been successfully attacked in any way after a period of "quiet", it usually has been a direct result of complacency on several levels. You only have to study history to learn this.

Anyone that would care to discuss any of this with me directly, feel free to get in touch.

'nuff said.

Keith McLellan
1st2fly@msn.com

[fnev]

To add to Keith comment (spot on): if say, you are a Norwegian identity (individual or company) that want to buy a restricted item (as an autopilot) in the US. You will be requested (among a lot of other things) to furnish an END USER CERTIFICATE.

What that means is that if it is for a use in Norway you will still have to tell for WHAT use. Than the relevant authority (in the US) will decide if it is safe and if so authorize the export. I am not speaking of the requirement by the Norwegian authorities to IMPORT these “goodies” (autopilots in this case).

Now say that Norway (friendly country with he US and in the “good” books) is friendly with a country that is NOT considered to be friendly by the US and some one want to use this to re-export the “goodies” to this particular country. You will still have to produce an end use certificate. End user means the FINAL client. We are looking at arms deals scenarios here, including AUTOPILOTS.

To get import permit from ANY country considered as “friendly” by the US is a MISSION. To re-export from these counties to an other country is becoming a NIGHTMARE.

Now think on a devious scheme and get these goodies in a “friendly” country with one bogus end user certificate and re-export to an other country under the radars… This is arms deals stuff here. It can be done BUT the risks are enormous and the country in the “middle” is going to get its relation with the US tarnished (big time)… How do YOU think this will end up??? I know of someone(s) in jail for a VERY long time because they tried to do something like this… And with the very same stuff that some of you consider as “no risk”… Of course the ones involved in this scheme new that was NOT so innocent…

Please guys, before making any statement, or reaching any conclusion consider VERY carefully ALL the implications. And as said Keith you even don’t have a clue about most of them: this is ONLY the tip of the iceberg here…

[Gary Mortimer]

Couple of months old so sorry if this has been posted already but just spotted it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-VElt7gbfg&feature=related

and this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUmTiGuTvsA

[tekrunner]

Couple of months old so sorry if this has been posted already but just spotted it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-VElt7gbfg&feature=related

and this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUmTiGuTvsA



I'm guessing words like the "Lavon Affair" or the USS Liberty are new to you guys. With friends like Israel who needs enemies?

[Gary Mortimer]

Funny you should say that because thats exactly what I was thinking ;-)

[tekrunner]

In regards to Gary's "Hezbollah UAV recovered wreckage" video...

Why would Arabic speaking Hezbollah attack Hebrew speaking Israel with a UAV with a logo written in English? Also part of the logo is airbrushed out.

All I'm saying is Israel has a long history of staging attacks and making it look like the evil mooslims did it.

"In war the first casualty is the truth" I take any info provided by ANY warring faction with a grain of salt.

[patrickegan]

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2009/03/us-jet-shoots-d.html

[Jack Crossfire]

Regardless of where this thread is going, it shows how GPS is everyone's friend. Fortunately Hezbollah's robotic killers are no match for our free mortgages.

[patrickegan]

Aren't they getting a bailout too?

[Gary Mortimer]

Humm I wonder who will be more damaging? Bankers or UAV fiddlers. Perhaps there should be ITAR and CoAs for bankers.

They have caused pain to thousands.

[fnev]

Gee, suddenly Garry has a lead over Patrick in the sarcastic department…!!!
I love it guys, so much truth in your (sarcastic) thoughts!!!

[Gary Mortimer]

Humm need to find out more.

Former Walter Reed Officer Charged With Exporting UAV Technology
By Matt Mientka, AUVSI Staff Writer
The federal government this month charged a former U.S. Army lieutenant colonel who worked at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center with conspiring to sell unmanned systems technology to China.

A grand jury indicted Harold Hanson, along with his wife, Yaming Nina Qi Hanson, for conspiracy and violating technology export laws. The government says the couple exported miniature controls used for small unmanned aerial vehicle systems.

The couple lives in Silver Spring, Md.

-----------------

Charges


13 February 2009: Qi was charged with exporting miniature controls for small unmanned aircraft to China.

12 March 2009: Harold Hanson (Husband) charged conspiring to sell sensitive technology to China

I picked that ball up a little late, sorry

[Gary Mortimer]

The Modern Mata Hari Speaks Mandarin

Two Chinese women are being prosecuted for stealing American technology for China. A Maryland resident, Yaming Nina Qi Hanson, was caught exporting miniaturized autopilots for UAVs. An Illinois resident, Hanjuan Jin, was caught trying to get electronics design data (from her former employer, Motorola) to China. In both cases, the women were motivated by cash, and appeals to "help the motherland." Both these cases are part of a Chinese plan for using industrial espionage to turn their country into the mightiest industrial and military power on the planet. For over two decades, China has been attempting to do what the Soviet Union never accomplished; steal Western technology, then use it to move ahead of the West. The Soviets lacked the many essential supporting industries found in the West (most founded and run by entrepreneurs), and was never able to get all the many pieces needed to match Western technical accomplishments. Soviet copies of American computers, for example, were crude, less reliable and less powerful. Same with their jet fighters, tanks and warships. China believes they can avoid the Soviet error by making it profitable for Western firms to set up factories in China, where Chinese managers and workers can be taught how to make things right. . . . Like the Russians, the Chinese are also using the traditional methods, using people with diplomatic immunity to recruit spies, and offering cash, or whatever, to get people to sell them information. This is still effective, and when combined with the "thousand grains of sand" methods, brings in lots of secrets. The final ingredient is a shadowy venture capital operations, sometimes called Project 863, that offers money for Chinese entrepreneurs who will turn the stolen technology into something real. No questions asked. If you can get back to China with the secrets, you are home free and potentially very rich. But there are some legal problems. When the Chinese steal some technology, and produce something that the Western victims can prove was stolen (via patents and prior use of the technology), legal action can make it impossible, or very difficult, to sell anything using the stolen tech, outside of China. For that reason, the Chinese like to steal military technology. This kind of stuff rarely leaves China. And in some cases, like manufacturing technology, there's an advantage to not selling it outside of China. Because China is still a communist dictatorship, the courts do as they are told, and they are rarely told to honor foreign patent claims. (Strategy Page, 8 Mar 09)

[Jack Crossfire]

The news dropped this story ever since the iPhone 3.0 came out, so we never heard the result of the trial other than more philosophy.

[smh20502]

though some issues are obvious theft. Isn't the reality of what is going on Capitalization its finest? After all, "theft" of ideas happen everyday but when it happens here in the States for a company in the States it's just standard operating procedure where the big company wins. Just think of the thousands of ideas that get stolen from individuals because the richer company that can higher the better attorneys or pay lobbyists to paint a better picture.

If China can build it cheaper then more power too them. The big corporate giants are just getting done to them what they have been doing to the little guy...and finding out it sucks.


Maybe after enough theft bully companies will get the message.

[kbosak]

One thing seriously stinks about all those regulations. You want to defend yourself as a country beyond reasonnable limits? Buy an ICBM or made your own. Want to promote 'safe policies'? Pay for the bureaucracy. So far, the Atto export users are charged 250USD for this US bureaucracy. Polish ppl are being charged cash for every visa for going to oh so fantastic USA or Russia. This is plain arrogancy and organised money greedines on international scale, based on taxing small things, seriously undermining the confidence in governments using such policies (actually almost all governments of the 'old world' pack). This has more about satisfying the retirement of their govt workers than about safety, I swear.