Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Government Patents United States Technology

Senator Rubio Targets Huawei Over Patents (reuters.com) 178

Posted by msmash from the tussle-continues dept.
hackingbear writes: While intellectual property violation is a major accusation against China in the on-going US-China trade war, U.S. Senator Marco Rubio filed legislation on Monday that would prevent Huawei from seeking damages in U.S. patent courts, after the Chinese firm demanded that Verizon Communications pay $1 billion to license the rights to patented technology. Under the amendment -- seen by Reuters -- companies on certain U.S. government watch lists, which would include Huawei, would not be allowed to seek relief under U.S. law with respect to U.S. patents, including bringing legal action over patent infringement.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Senator Rubio Targets Huawei Over Patents More

Senator Rubio Targets Huawei Over Patents

Comments Filter:

  • Good if we trusted the watchlists to be honest (Score:5, Interesting)

    by nonBORG ( 5254161 ) on Tuesday June 18, 2019 @05:28PM (#58784320)
    This seems to be too open to abuse, if we had absolute total confidence in our Senators then no problem. If Verizon can call up a senator and ask them to draft legislation how hard would it be to get a company put on a watch list?

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      As with anything, restraint is essential.

      If they "go too far", or start just placing any company on that list, then other nations will retaliate with the same.

      However, there are a LOT of treaties between most countries with respect to intellectual property. I don't think there's much with respect to China. Which really is what everyone is going on about, so.. I don't see it as a big issue.

      For example, should some Canadian or British firm end up on said watch list? Well, these countries have courts, follo

      • Qualcomm, in the last quarter alone, received $3.7 billion in licensing revenue. 2/3 of Qualcomm revenue is from Chinese smartphone manufacturers.

      • I don't think there's much with respect to China. Which really is what everyone is going on about, so.. I don't see it as a big issue.

        Yes. and still every company wants to do business there. "We don't respect intelectual property treaties". "Doesn't matter." "OK, we also require you to form joint ventures to give chinese partner companies easier access to your IP" "SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY! HOORAY!!"

        and now they come back crying about "unfair treatment" Yes, a boxing match between me and Mike Tyson would be unfair. But this is like me hitting on his girlfriend in a bar Saturday evening and calling it an unfair fight next morning in hospi

    • Re:Good if we trusted the watchlists to be honest (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 18, 2019 @05:48PM (#58784440)

      No, this isn't open to abuse, it IS abuse. Quite simply, the proposed legislation alows for the US companies to sue others, while being granted legal permission to openly steal from them. All this after abusing a company because there there MIGHT be a possibility that said foreign company MIGHT potentially at some time cooperate with their government to spy on others, without there ever having been even the slightest shred of evidence to even raise the suspicion, let alone proof.

      Of course in the meantime the US companies, such as Microsoft, Cisco, Apple, Google and others are known to be actively spying on foreign governments and are rewarded with hero status, massive tax benefits and lucrative government contracts.

      All pretty typical of the US double standards of course.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        Could actually be a solution to the current US/China IP war. Both sides just agree to ignore each others' IP, the world gets flooded with knock-off iPhones that are identical to the real thing, America starts churning out knock-off Huawei 5G hardware, everyone wins???

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Shaitan ( 22585 )

      Given that this would be preventing foreign actors from suing companies in the US I'm not sure I follow why we'd care.

      • Given that this would be preventing foreign actors from suing companies in the US I'm not sure I follow why we'd care.

        Because soon this will be expanded to cover US actors from suing companies in the US depending on which Senator has more financial interests in what state.

        See former Senator Carl Levin from Michigan . . . he was not interested in the needs of the US, but that of General Motors.

        Should we block patent enforcement from Toyota and VW to protect the US big two, GM and Ford?

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Shaitan ( 22585 )

          "Because soon this will be expanded to cover US actors from suing companies in the US depending on which Senator has more financial interests in what state."

          And how exactly are they supposed to get US actors onto a federal ban list? You're suggesting we are going to block trade with ourselves over national security concerns?

          That doesn't compute.

        • Most people are already barred from suing in the large companies for patient infringement anyway, how far do you think you will get suing google, or apple before you go bankrupt from legal costs.

      • American companies make a lot of money licensing patents in foreign countries.

        The US government has worked very hard to make patent protection global. It's not perfect. There are still a lot of costs associated with filing patents in different countries around the world, but it works in general pretty well, which is why Qualcomm is able to not only collect royalties in the US, but also in Europe, China (yes, that China), South Korea, and many other countries, and why drug companies are able to fend off generics for a decade in most locations, except for a couple like India.

        All that hard work goes out the window if we start discriminating against foreign owners of patents. And believe me, a lot of countries would love an excuse to not have to pay the US for its inventions.

        • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

          by Anonymous Coward

          All that hard work goes out the window if we start discriminating against foreign owners of patents. And believe me, a lot of countries would love an excuse to not have to pay the US for its inventions.

          The old saying : Penny wise and pound foolish fits what Rubio is doing, and the effects to the US patent system, as a result.

          I live in a foreign land, and I can't wait for the day the world at large openly ignore legal liability of violating US patents. I, and millions of foreigners like me will rake in truckloads of money making stuffs without having to pay patent royalties.

          Go ahead, Rubio, do what you do best, and we will in turn do what we do best.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by phayes ( 202222 )

          It's not wasting any hard work when Huawei was already caught time after time cheating and were blatantly claiming to be untouchable.

          I don't agree with Trump or Rubio on much but Huawei's open and continual spying and flouting American export laws is coming back to bite them in the ass.

          They thought that access to the Chinese market would let them both profit from any foreign tech they needed to boot their company and gain advantages over their concurrents until they could develop their own IP, playing both

          • "I don't agree with Trump or Rubio on much but Huawei's open and continual spying and flouting American export laws is coming back to bite them in the ass."

            Proof that if you repeat just about ANYTHING enough times people will start just assuming it's true.

            Bruh, WHAT FUCKING SPYING? Do you have actual proof or are you just belching up Trump's latest fart? Both of you can either put up or STFU.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      I happen to agree with this in concept because it makes no sense that a company unable to do business because they steal IP should be able to make money from that stolen IP, but I agree with you at the same.

      Congress is not in control of the list at all: the President created it and controls it. Politicians, particularly at the individual level, can be swayed.

      That being said, I suspect that Huawei would have zero trouble handing off the patents to a subsidiary and bypassing any such ban anyway.

      • What Huawei would do is the least you need to worry. Qualcomm alone had near (or over ?) $10 billion revenue in licensing in the last year. Thanking about 2/3 of it could be gone, one company, in one year.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      As long as they are foreigners, I don't care. Your slippery slope argument doesn't faze me at all.

    • Re:Good if we trusted the watchlists to be honest (Score:5, Insightful)

      by youngone ( 975102 ) on Tuesday June 18, 2019 @07:55PM (#58785134)

      If Verizon can call up a senator and ask them to draft legislation...

      Why wouldn't Verizon (or any other corporation) just phone their senator (or governor, or president) and tell them to expect the legislation the corporation has drafted?
      You might be confused about who runs America.

    • I'm off topic, but I read your sig:

      You can't handle the truth! - Because I don't post left all my comments get modded down, bye bye Karma.

      and I read your argument summary:

      Sorry slashdot but you have been had by left wing on the troll button stealing our first amendment rights. I am thinking we who have been effected could take a class action against slashdot for suppressing our first amendment rights.

      Perhaps I can help clarify?

      The first amendment does not apply to a private, moderated platform like /. You and I "agree" to certain ToS when we sign up. Read it again (I did).

      CaptainDork's 21st Corollary: "ToS: The only right we have is to leave."

      I hope your Karma rebounds. I mean that.

  • Tit for tat on the table then (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 18, 2019 @05:29PM (#58784322)

    China, India, Europe should all just treat American patents likewise. Finally a chance to kill off the IP vultures.

    • Re:Tit for tat on the table then (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 18, 2019 @05:40PM (#58784394)

      We want China to honor IP so we are going to lead with a example of not honoring theirs.

      What could possibly go wrong.

      On the bright side, the Whitehouse may be off the list for today's least thought out thing to do.

      • If that was the intention, sure that's stupid.

        On the other hand, maybe the intention is to reverse the integration of China into global trade started by Nixon and to re-isolate them. To restart a cold war with Russia, China and allies on one side ... and the rest of the world on the other.

        If that is the intention, this is par for the course.

      • I came here to make this observation. It's kinda like slamming China for human rights violations when America can't fix its own human rights abuses.

  • They are stealing all our patents, so we must steal theirs!

    • I'm having a hard time feeling sorry for either side. If all patents went away today, nothing of value would be lost.

    • They are stealing all our patents, so we must steal theirs!

      This is all so wrong in many ways.

      The US used to pride itself in taking the moral high ground.

      And the legislative and judicial branches should be separated. This seems to be an attempt from the legislative branch from blocking the job that they are supposed to do.

  • Thanks for the reminder! (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Hackingbear, congratulations on finding another evidence of American hypocrisy! We thank you for sending us the weekly reminders of that. But do you think we Americans care? No, we are the most powerful superpower on this planet! We can bully you anyway we want, hypocritical or not.

  • As if the broken patent system wasn't already bad enough.

  • Actually looks like it was submitted last Thursday, according to the Congressional Record [congress.gov]:

    Mr. RUBIO submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
    him to the bill S. 1790, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year
    2020 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military
    construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy,
    to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for
    other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

    At the appropriate place in title X, insert the following:

    SEC. ___. PROHIBITION ON RELIEF RELATING TO PATENT
    INFRINGEMENT.

    (a) Definition.--In this section, the term ``covered
    entity''--
    (1) means an entity that--
    (A) is owned by, controlled by, affiliated with, or acting
    at the direction of an entity that is organized under the
    laws of, or otherwise subject to the jurisdiction of, a
    country, the government of which is on the priority watch
    list established by the United States Trade Representative
    pursuant to section 182(a) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19
    U.S.C. 2242(a)); and
    (B) has engaged in an action that is prohibited under--
    (i) section 1(a) of Executive Order 13873 (84 Fed. Reg.
    22689; relating to securing the information and
    communications technology and services supply chain); or
    (ii) any regulations issued in response to the Executive
    Order described in clause (i); and
    (2) includes any subsidiary, affiliate, employee, or
    representative of, and any related party with respect to, an
    entity described in paragraph (1), without regard to the
    location or jurisdiction of incorporation of that subsidiary,
    affiliate, employee, representative, or party, as applicable.
    (b) Prohibition.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
    law or regulation, no covered entity may--
    (1) bring or maintain an action for infringement of a
    patent under title 35, United States Code;
    (2) file a complaint with the United States International
    Trade Commission for an investigation under section 337 of
    the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337); or
    (3) otherwise obtain any relief under the laws of the
    United States, including for damages, injunctive relief, or
    other redress, with respect to a patent issued by the United
    States Patent and Trademark Office.

    • Re:Text of the actual amendment (Score:5, Insightful)

      by HiThere ( 15173 ) <charleshixsn@@@earthlink...net> on Tuesday June 18, 2019 @06:58PM (#58784828)

      Sounds like the US is withdrawing from the WTO.

      You can argue that that's good or bad, but if that passes and is applied, then the US is likely to be found in violation, and to have judgments against it to the effect that the US cannot enforce patent or copyright laws against various injured parties under WTO based treaties. This has happened before for lesser causes.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Sounds like the US is withdrawing from the WTO.

        Pretty much, yes. Trump has said quite often he doesn't like to be subject to these international bodies.

        Well, guess what? That's a two way street ... if the US doesn't wish to play by the rules of the WTO, they don't get any of the protections of the WTO, and any sane country would pretty much have to say any treaties related to the IP of American companies are null and void because clearly the US doesn't intend to honor any reciprocal agreements.

        Trump likes

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by dj245 ( 732906 )

        Sounds like the US is withdrawing from the WTO.

        The WTO is largely a toothless entity. The US filed dozens of complaints against China for their patent violations and closed markets, and got nowhere. The only remedy that the WTO has anyway is to allow a country to enact tariffs and other trade barriers. After trying for years or decades to work through the WTO, the US got sick of this and just threw up tariffs anyway. It's the only lever available if the other country isn't playing ball with trademarks, copyrights, patents, and government subsidies.

  • Unconstitutional? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by SoftwareArtist ( 1472499 ) on Tuesday June 18, 2019 @06:27PM (#58784658)

    Ok, I'm not a lawyer, but doesn't this totally violate the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment? You can't just declare that certain parties can't go to court to seek relief for violations of the law.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by HiThere ( 15173 )

      I'd be quite willing to argue that corporations are not people.

      • I'd be quite willing to argue that corporations are not people.

        REN Zhengfei is a person. Why shouldn't he have standing to sue in his official capacity as representative of the Huawei patent portfolio?

    • Ok, I'm not a lawyer, but doesn't this totally violate the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment? You can't just declare that certain parties can't go to court to seek relief for violations of the law.

      It would, except Senator Rubio is lawyer enough to write it [slashdot.org] generically. It's "any organization subject to the jurisdiction of a government on the priority watch list of the United States Trade Representative." So no individual and no organization is named in the law, so it's not technically a bill of attainder. The list [ustr.gov] currently has 11 countries on it. It applies to every company and every individual in those 11 countries.

      Algeria, Argentina, Chile, China, India, Indonesia, Kuwait, Russia, Saudi Arabia

    • Takings clause of 5th. Govt/taxpayers pay instead (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Ungrounded Lightning ( 62228 ) on Tuesday June 18, 2019 @09:47PM (#58785540) Journal

      Ok, I'm not a lawyer, but doesn't this totally violate the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment?

      I'm not either, but the constitution and amendments were supposed to be understandable by ordinary people, too.

      You may be right on equal protection. Also on Article I Section 9's prohibition on bills of attainder.

      But IMHO it's also a Fifth Amendment "taking":

      ...nor shall any person ... be deprived of ... property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

      This means that, having recognized that a patent-granted limited monopoly and the licensing of what it protects constitutes a thing of value, if the government takes away that value, it must pay for it. Blocking the corporate owner from using the courts to enforce his property rights is a denial of due process and a taking (without the denied due process) of a things of value.

      (Corporations are "persons" as a convenient shorthand method of handling, in legal proceedings, the enforcement of the collected rights and responsibilities of their stockholders.)

      • I mostly agree with you, but isn't passing a law "due process of law"?

        It still falls afoul of the "without just compensation clause" but that only applies if the property was taken for public use, so ultimately, I do not think the 5th applies.

        It seems like it should be violating so many previous laws that it should be absurd to even suggest making this list... WTF is going on with America and its people?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by mentil ( 1748130 )

      Sig checks out.

  • Wow .. and so it begins ... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 18, 2019 @06:37PM (#58784712)

    Under the amendment companies on certain U.S. government watch lists, which would include Huawei, would not be allowed to seek relief under U.S. law with respect to U.S. patents, including bringing legal action over patent infringement.

    And here we see the beginning of the point at which US law becomes malleable to subvert it to political whims, and the US ceases to be any of the things it claims itself to be.

    Are the patents valid? Were they lawfully assigned? In which case, how can you do that?

    Since Trump has said several times he would change the blacklisting of Huawei if he got a better trade deal ... or that he would intervene in the extradition of the Huawei CFO from Canada if he got a better trade deal ... at that point every other country and company in the world would be forced to reach one inescapable conclusion, American laws are now political tools to be applied as they wish to get what they want.

    How is anybody supposed to believe these things are anything but bargaining leverage? And if America is going to bend her laws for that, America has lost all credibility, you could add any company to that list to basically strip them of their legal rights if it got you some leverage to screw people over in negotiations.

    This is America blatantly saying they will make their laws not uniformly applied so they can punish foreign corporations when the President is already saying he would intervene for trade ... are they breaking the law, or is this bullshit? That Trump would intervene says it's hard to believe the claims are real.

    Now, imagine another country did this, Americans would be screeching and howling and decrying it as unlawful.

    So, really, take your pick ... either America is a country with rule of law and an independent judicial system ... or America is now essentially a banana republic where the laws are what the leaders say they are to get what they want. This law basically says the latter is now true and that the law in America is a purely political tool.

    If that's the case, the Americans should shut the fuck up, and accept that other countries might decide to change laws on a whim to give themselves an advantage in a trade dispute.

    If this is what America is turning into, then it's time we all stopped pretending to care what the fuck America has to say on any topic because we can't trust you to not be lying assholes.

    This is literally America gaming their own legal system to give themselves an advantage, so the expectation should be that everyone else will do it to you.

    Congratulations, America, you are becoming the asshole most of us have been warning of for years. Making up laws as you go and changing the rules midway through the game to suit yourself.

    You should expect China to basically retaliate in kind, and do it quite severely.

    Congratulations, you are now governed by crooks and thugs who think they can do anything they want with the law, just like China. I honestly didn't expect to see this kind of a low in my lifetime, but at this point the US cannot ever be taken at face value on anything if they pull shit like this.

    Rubio sounds like he hasn't got the barest idea of the complete cluster fuck of international relations and law he is creating here, and he's establishing the precedent that the US laws are bullshit tools of political gain when it suits them, just like every other corrupt country the US likes to complain about.

    Wow, just fucking wow, The Republicans have now become the Banana Republicans.

    American Exceptionalism has finally spilled over to tainting your judicial system, you should all be very proud, just don't be surprised when someone does the same to you. Just remember, you have lost the moral standing to complain and are little better than any piss pot dictatorship.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gweihir ( 88907 )

      This has been going on for a while, it just became even more obvious. It also either indicates extreme stupidity (if China has much more to gain if it can now ignore US patents) or it indicates that US patents are worth less than Chinese ones by now. Not good at all in both cases. It also is the official beginning of the US as a pirate nation, after it had styled itself as exactly the obvious for a long time.

  • How about we consider the 1 trillion dollars or so worth of IP/copyright/trademark/patents that Chinese companies have illegally copied from Americans companies and we call it even.

  • So Rubio is now a patent pirate accomplice? (Score:3)

    by gweihir ( 88907 ) on Tuesday June 18, 2019 @07:04PM (#58784862)

    Because what he suggests amounts to legalized theft. Give that the Chinese have much more to gain if they can simply ignore US patents, this is a move that could not be much more stupid.

    • Give that the Chinese have much more to gain if they can simply ignore US patents, this is a move that could not be much more stupid.

      U.S. patents are enforced in the U.S., generally based on activities that take place entirely inside the U.S. What exactly are you proposing the Chinese are going to do to "ignore" U.S. patents, and how are they going to do that?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by gweihir ( 88907 )

        You think the Chinese are only selling to the US?

        • You think U.S. patent rights can be enforced on sales outside the U.S.?

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by gweihir ( 88907 )

            That is why you get an _international_ patent, obviously.

            • That is why you get an _international_ patent, obviously.

              Oh, this is getting more fun by the minute (so fun I'm going to ignore for the moment that you're moving the goalposts from your original statement about how China could just "ignore US patents"). Where do I go to get an "international patent"? What rights do I get from one? What body grants those rights? What body enforces them? I'll wait.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by tepples ( 727027 )

        The Chinese would ignore and/or not grant Chinese patents owned by U.S. assignees based on activities that occur in China.

        • The Chinese would ignore and/or not grant Chinese patents owned by U.S. assignees based on activities that occur in China.

          Very possibly, but what has that to do with OP's original proposition that China could "simply ignore US patents"?

          • Because what he suggests amounts to legalized theft. Give that the Chinese have much more to gain if they can simply ignore US patents, this is a move that could not be much more stupid.

            U.S. patents are enforced in the U.S., generally based on activities that take place entirely inside the U.S. What exactly are you proposing the Chinese are going to do to "ignore" U.S. patents, and how are they going to do that?

            The Chinese would ignore and/or not grant Chinese patents owned by U.S. assignees based on activities that occur in China.

            Very possibly, but what has that to do with OP's original proposition that China could "simply ignore US patents"?

            What it has to do depends on whether by "US patents" OP meant the legal meaning of a a patent issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), or the colloquial meaning of a patent issued by any country's patent office and assigned to a U.S. firm. The featured article is about a proposal to have the United States block a Chinese company from asserting said company's patent issued by the USPTO. The mirror situation, which I understood to be the expected retaliation, would be China blocking a

            • What it has to do depends on whether by "US patents" OP meant the legal meaning of a a patent issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), or the colloquial meaning of a patent issued by any country's patent office and assigned to a U.S. firm.

              I think you're trying too hard to salvage OP's simply wrong-headed proposition. If that's really what he was trying to say (there's certainly no generally understood "colloquial meaning" to that effect), it's passably strange he didn't explain that himself instead of just vanishing into the woodwork.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by tepples ( 727027 )

                it's passably strange he didn't explain that himself instead of just vanishing into the woodwork.

                I imagine part of that is because has been half broken for a month from now. The Slashbox that used to link to your inbox [slashdot.org] no longer does.

  • Huawei owns at least 1/3 of all 5g patents. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    This is US attempts to steal China's patents after it finally was able to leap frog US tech, which owns almost no patents in 5g. Congrats, instead of insidiously stealing tech., you just outright steal it in broad daylight.

  • Awesome, should be a heap of great, cheaper stuff coming out of China soon.

    If the US doesn't respect a Chinese company's legally filed US Patents.....China shouldn't have to respect any legally filed US Patents either.

  • brilliant (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    this will annul any copyright claims US has against China...

  • bitching about patents when a chinese company is using it without compensation, but making laws to prevent other chinese companies from protecting their patents... My god, the americans really are big hypocrites... But we already knew that..

  • I don't get it (Score:3)

    by nospam007 ( 722110 ) * on Wednesday June 19, 2019 @06:26AM (#58787050)

    So the government/lawmakers and technology firms work together against the foreign competition?

    Isn't that exactly what people accuse China of doing?

    Ok Rubio is a moron, but anyway, people around him could point out the irony, but I guess he's immune to that, being Republican and all.

  • America's power stems almost entirely from its position as protector of fair business. Our currency is the world's currency because the world trusts our laws will continue to be enforced and they will preserve the status quo in business interests, contracts, IP, etc.

    This undermines America's power by telling foreign companies our courts won't protect their interests if Congress and the president have a bad week.

Slashdot Top Deals

Stellar rays prove fibbing never pays. Embezzlement is another matter.

Close