US Warns Against Using Huawei Chips 'Anywhere in the World' (ft.com) 73
President Donald Trump's administration has taken a tougher stance on Chinese technology advances, warning companies around the world that using AI chips made by Huawei could trigger criminal penalties for violating US export controls. From a report: The commerce department issued guidance to clarify that Huawei's Ascend processors were subject to export controls because they almost certainly contained, or were made with, US technology.
Its Bureau of Industry and Security, which oversees export controls, said on Tuesday it was taking a more stringent approach to foreign AI chips, including "issuing guidance that using Huawei Ascend chips anywhere in the world violates US export controls." But people familiar with the matter stressed that the bureau had not issued a new rule, but was making it clear to companies that Huawei chips are likely to have violated a measure that requires hard-to-get licences to export US technology to the Chinese company.
Its Bureau of Industry and Security, which oversees export controls, said on Tuesday it was taking a more stringent approach to foreign AI chips, including "issuing guidance that using Huawei Ascend chips anywhere in the world violates US export controls." But people familiar with the matter stressed that the bureau had not issued a new rule, but was making it clear to companies that Huawei chips are likely to have violated a measure that requires hard-to-get licences to export US technology to the Chinese company.
Re:look at me ma! (Score:5, Insightful)
More like the laughing stock of the world. Now with extra flavor of Arabian corruption.
Why did we surrender to Huawei? (Score:3)
Problematic thread... What is troll food? I can actually see you agreeing with the AC to go for the funny, but I think that in general propagating their Subjects is "bad form" and all that some of them are hoping to accomplish with their virtual lives...
My Subject is about the aspect I was hoping to see. I think the crucial thing is that America is surrendering as regards computer security. If our security experts were still superior to the Chinese security experts, then we would be able to assess the secur
Re: (Score:1)
You surrendered to Huawei for the same reason you surrendered to trump, because you are lazy, unprincipled and like lying to yourselves.
Perhaps you watched too many superhero movies, believed superheroes exist and then convinced yourselves you're one instead of the giant leach on everyone else that you have been for the past 90 years.
But you're like elona and the rest of your government-funded "algorithm billionaires", in order to lose weight you don't exercise anymore, you swallow an expensive pill that y
Re: look at me ma! (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It wasn't Al Qaeda, it was Iraq. And yes, none were found despite Cheney saying, "We know they have them and we know where they are."
Re: (Score:2)
perhaps the AC is referring to the magical link between AL-Q and Iraq which led to the justification needed for Iraq invasion
Re: (Score:2)
The alleged residence of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, as well as the WMDs were the pretext for the war, the justification was grabbing the oil.
Oil was grabbed allright, by China, because the US companies were worried about THE US laws that dealt with an occupying power shelling out concessions on natural resources of an occupied territory. A totally different age, legally, from today's US.
So in the end the whole op was a miserable failure.
Re: (Score:2)
U.S. jets patrolling the no-fly-zone were routinely shot at. Technically, the war never ended
LOL, Rumsfeld, you old Nazi prick, how are you getting internet access in hell?
US has stolen tons of IP! (Score:2)
Particularlly since the United States stole tons of IP all through the 18th century. That's how we got robber barons and the Gilded age.
The Spies Who Launched America’s Industrial Revolution from water-powered textile mills, to mechanical looms, much of the machinery that powered America's early industrial success was "borrowed" from Europe." [history.com]
“The picture of the world’s richest man killing the world’s poorest children is not a pretty one,”
-- Bill Gates about Elon Musk
the US Gov is corrupt beyond fixing (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Of course elections won't fix a thing. The morality of the electorate is simple - "when someone steals from us, it is a sin, when we steal, it is a blessing".
Re: (Score:2)
Reminds me of the old soviet union mantra:
"What's ours is ours. What's yours is negociable."
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, that was the foundation of the international relations.
Incidentally, the internal economics was based on another slogan: "What is mine is mine, what's common is also mine".
Which appears to be the new US domestic economic policy.
Re: (Score:1)
> "when someone steals from us, it is a sin, when we steal, it is a blessing".
To quote a certain Mr. L Jackson.... "Evidence .......... Do you have any?"
Export Controls? (Score:5, Interesting)
First, here's a link [channelnewsasia.com] to an article that isn't paywalled.
I work for a medium-sized aerospace company, and I'm familiar with ITAR and EAR export control regulations, but I'm confused by this warning regarding Huawei processor chips. Export controls require licenses from the State Department (ITAR) or Dept of Commerce (EAR) for a company to EXPORT certain restricted technologies. How does IMPORTING Huawei chips for use in a product in the US violate EXPORT control laws?
Re:Export Controls? (Score:5, Informative)
I don't claim to understand intimately the thinking of the current administration, but extrapolating recent examples of, shall we call it trumpthink, it probably goes like this:
"Gina is bad, very bad, it is cheating us, so it must be that Huawei has stolen our technology. It is impossible that anyone else can design and build a processor. So if a processor that was built with what we say is our stolen technology, then we didn't give permission to trade it, therefore all transactions are a crime".
Or some such.
Re: (Score:3)
There is no "thinking" by the current administration.
Just a constant stream of reactive retribution against perceived enemies.
The Orange Fascist just rambles on with senile hallucinations and the rest of the MAGA crowd just hums along.
Re: (Score:2)
Fine, but the above is what I think is the argument, even if they've gotten it from chat-gpt, like they did with the tariffs.
Since it is "stolen", it wasn't "legally exported", therefore by obtaining it anywhere you're "in violation".
Which actually means that if you're in a jurisdiction that has an extradition treaty with the US, they can legally attack you at home, and if you're not, they can legally attack you if you travel to a country with an extradition treaty.
And since an extradition treaty is a prere
Re: (Score:2)
Which actually means that if you're in a jurisdiction that has an extradition treaty with the US, they can legally attack you at home
They can apply to extradite, but they first have to convince a judge in that country that there is a legal basis.. They have to show how you did acts that were under their criminal jurisdiction and how you broke criminal laws within that jurisdiction. They gotta have evidence you did something that is a serious criminal offense and would be sufficient to charge you if committ
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone remember Kim Dotcom? A foreigner who has never set foot in the USA but they're extraditing him for allegedly breaking US laws.
Re: (Score:2)
It's going to be interesting to see the effect of the fairly limited controls China has placed on exports to the US. I don't mean the rare earths or that kind of thing, I mean the technology. We may be about to find out how much of it is actually US tech that was stolen and how much the US actually relies on China for.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't follow these too closely, what kind of restrictions except the rare earths, which take up all the journo attention?
Re: (Score:2)
China basically decided to cut the US off from them, in retaliation for the tariffs.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but what else?
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair, a lot of it IS US technology that was exported. You couldn't do business in China without doing that. Calling it "stolen" it not accurate.
OTOH, some of it actually was stolen. How much???? More than they're admitting and less than the US is claiming.
P.S.: Back before WWI the US stole lots of technology from other countries. Before the Civil War we were even more open about it. In China's case, though, I *think* most of it was legally justified (by local laws) so stolen isn't really the co
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, except now with the not insignificant force of a former superpower behind it.
Re: (Score:2)
The USA apparently think that the Huawei chips were illegally exported from USA to China, therefore their existence is illegal. Something like a b.stard child, conceived in sin. The current USA government seems very tough on sin.
Re: (Score:2)
This is an "intellectual property is real property" claim. They would claim that some of the ideas in the chips were exported illegally (e.g. stolen by spies). Now those chips contain those ideas so count as illegal exports.
Re: (Score:2)
They only claim that they probably contain those ideas. I don't know how you enforce on a hypothetical basis.
Re: (Score:2)
You make the case that it's probable beyond the level of raising reasonable suspicion based on there being little alternative and then you ask in court for (probably legally protected so you can't copy from them) the design documentation. Based on that you can check. If they refuse to provide or have destroyed the documents then that's typically sufficient for you to win the case. If they provide fake documents you prove they don't work and, again, win the case.
Re: (Score:2)
They could do that. As far as I know, they haven't done that. They are proceeding as if they had.
Re: (Score:3)
I doubt one person in his cabinet could pass a high school civics exam
Re: (Score:2)
Well, their solution is to abolish the Department of Education. No education, no civics exam. Problem solved.
Re: (Score:2)
How does IMPORTING Huawei chips for use in a product in the US violate EXPORT control laws?
It seems like the Administration decided since the chips contain US technology each new chip manufactured outside the US by Huawei also counts as a new illegal exportation from the US, and any company they sell that chip to is complicit in the illegal export of that chip.
I have no idea if the law actually supports this idea the administration has. In my view it would seem like violation of the Export control occu
Re: Export Controls? (Score:2)
It turns out that ITAR regulations do indeed consider theft and export to a foreign entity of controlled material, an export license violation. However, the EXPORTER is the entity guilty of the violation. I suppose you could make a case for the recipient of the illegal export being guilty of an export violation if transfer the material to someone else, but at that point the guilty party isn't under US jurisdiction, so the likelihood of enforcement seems rather low. If that transfer is to an entity in the US
Re: (Score:2)
However, the EXPORTER is the entity guilty of the violation.
This is my thought exactly.. Since the export is Information instead of materials; possibly stolen by the foreign company through acts of espionage the Spies and/or whoever conspired with them to get the information outside the US might have committed a crime at that point.
They might be all guilty parties of that export crime; even one or more Huawei employee(s) may even be guilty co-conspirators.
However, now that export has already happened -
Re: Export Controls? (Score:2)
How does IMPORTING Huawei chips for use in a product in the US violate EXPORT control laws?
Allegedly violating US IP laws (patents). Plus various multilateral IP protection laws. Nothing may be imported here, but third parties importing from China would fall under the treaty jurisdiction.
Re: (Score:2)
Remember when SSL with large encryption keys was export controlled by the US? It was legal to use elsewhere in the world. Widely available. But it was illegal to send from the US to elsewhere.
This government is claiming that "something" in their technology is stolen from the US but without any proof. But under that assumption, they are claiming that the information existing elsewhere in the world is itself proof of an export violation.
How does IMPORTING Huawei chips for use in a product in the US violate EXPORT control laws?
And going by the above, don't forget that it is already not allowed to
Re: (Score:2)
Also, Trump is no longer content with being the King of a cowardly Republican Party, he wants the world to "kiss the ring". So he's issuing nonsense rules that reveal, he's the boss of them.
Yeah, this will work. (Score:2)
The US is ensuring that Chinese companies will expand their operations into anything and everything which might be sanctioned or banned in the future.
It's like Star Wars (Score:2)
Only Palpatine is a diaper-shitting petulant child... and somehow still in the big chair without getting cut down immediately by an apprentice.
The more Trump tries to squeeze the world, the more he violates American agreements with other countries, the less the world is going to care about honouring their side of those agreements.
Why the fuck should I care about respecting American concerns over AI chips when they've launched an economic war against my country with the stated goal of annexation? I'd rather
Disney's Star Wars (Score:2)
Only Palpatine is a diaper-shitting petulant child
Ah, so you mean it is like Disney's Star Wars.
Re: (Score:2)
Emo-Vader turned me off the franchise (excluding Andor, which just keeps getting better)... but even Kylo with all his temper tantrums and stupid angst crap was infinitely more capable than the guy currently occupying the American White House.
The actual Emperor character? Didn't have the mood and tantrum issues, and he wasn't stupid. Just a boring MacGuffin to drive the plot, but serviceable enough in the original trilogy.
TL;DR: Sorry, gotta disagree. Unless they changed Palpatine a lot for the sequel t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
MAGA will ignore Trump's violations of American agreements and use the refusal of other governments to hold up their end of agreements as justification for further violations by Trump. And the cycle of idiocy continues.
Re: (Score:2)
There's no point in playing Trump's game because he's going to do what he's going to do. It's just a matter of how easily he can create a justification for it, and he cares less about that every day.
The best policy (I think, anyway) is to assume he's an evil lying sonofabitch waiting to stick a knife in you as soon as he feels he can get away with it. You don't appease, you don't flatter... but you do play it a bit softly just to slow-walk the process while you try to prepare for the inevitable.
China had the upper hand (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Buy it in UK / EU and have it shipped over. There's ads all day for BYD vehicles over here. Not so much Huawei, they don't seem to bother that much when there's so many ads for Apple, Google and Samsung devices already.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: China had the upper hand (Score:1)
It's not as if Xi needs to worry that the owners of those shut down factories are going to vote for someone else. He can let those high tariffs continue for as long as he wants.
US politicians, on the other hand, they need to keep voters happy.
We have a temporary pause in the highest tariffs right now, but China still has the upper hand in the negotiations. They know this. Do you think that Trump knows this?
Playing a game of chicken is not a good idea when the other player is controlling their car from a saf
How? (Score:4, Interesting)
How do US criminal penalties work "Anywhere in the World"?
Also, do the US courts issue verdicts against people who have "likely" violated the law?
Re: (Score:3)
With the international courts still having some sense of reality?.. No..
In short, by claiming this, its also giving other countries legal rights to sue US companies on "likely violated" laws.. (tit for tat).. and China owns a ton of 5G patents (in fact for 5G and 6G technology, China has the MOST patents and controls of any country in the world).. So they COULD sue the US back to the stone age.. (who needs a bomb when lawyers are just as destructive but wi
Re: (Score:3)
How do US criminal penalties work "Anywhere in the World"?
The same way the GDPR does.
Re: (Score:2)
How do US criminal penalties work "Anywhere in the World"?
Also, do the US courts issue verdicts against people who have "likely" violated the law?
The way it works, or at least used to work, is that the US would use trade treaties to get US laws onto the books in non-US countries bypassing the government of that country, then apply diplomatic or economic pressure to force that country to enforce said law. Pretty much "do as we tell you or you won't trade with us". This used to be done with a lot of soft power and I say "used to" as over the last 25 years there have been 3 Republican governments that have pretty much destroyed the US's soft power, so y
Remember the missle in the vent, Iraq war? (Score:1)
Would Mean More if Not Coming from a Racist Liar (Score:2)
Everyone is missing the big picture (Score:2)
Because in the end, the only way to really put an end to China producing products using "stolen" U.S. Tech is to go there by force and put a stop to it.
Re: Everyone is missing the big picture (Score:1)
Brain dead (Score:2)
The idea that the US can enforce export controls on an extraterritorial basis anywhere in the world is brain dead and anyone with a good reason to disagree with such delusions should hold such claims in contempt and do whatever they reasonably would do otherwise.
The BIS Links (Score:2)
- https://media.bis.gov/press-re... [bis.gov]
- https://www.bis.gov/media/docu... [bis.gov]