3 ms·

The very name of that website sounds like some sort of propaganda department. Notwithstanding that, the claims it makes are all of comparatively trivial offense

The very name of that website sounds like some sort of propaganda department. Notwithstanding that, the claims it makes are all of comparatively trivial offenses. The "top 3rd" one was awarded 10 million by a US court, peanuts compared to company revenue (e.g. a US judge awarded Apple 1 billion in damages from Samsung). The "top 2nd" one links to a blog by a Cisco officer whose only technically-specific example he could give was copying some code from strcmp.c - ooooo strcmp.c! That is going to really get an edge over the competition! LOL. The PDF link describing details about the 1st one was broken, but it sounds like a standard case of employees leaving a company to work for a competitor (allowed under California law) and the old company going sour grapes. Didn't bother reading 4 and 5, after how overblown 2 and 3 were.

nemothekid 6y ago
I'm sorry I didn't analyze the source too hard before selecting. I'm only really familiar with Huawei's and Cisco's patent troubles (summarized on Wikipedia here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Huawei#Cisco_patent_lawsuit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Huawei#Cisco_pate...)
- infinity0 6y ago
  The wikipedia article does not go into that much technical details. Do you have more? Given that the Cisco officer could only talk about strcmp and not something more substantial, I am inclined to believe the story was overblown. On a separate note, I think the biggest most obvious question that any accuser has to answer is, if Huawei copied so much significant material, why are they ahead of everyone else? It takes time to digest copied technology, it is not a simple case of just copying your competitor's source code then racing ahead of them with a massive sales team and non-technical economic prowess. Given that intellectual property laws were constructed to (supposedly) encourage innovation, even if Huawei did get to where they are now by copying, doesn't that suggest that in fact it's a good thing, they have brought all this extra innovative technology to the world? Or are the monopolists simply going sour grapes because they are no longer at the the forefront?
  - infinity0 6y ago
    Typical anonymous cowards at hacker news, downvoting without the guts or intellect to actually defend their own religious ideologies.
    - mtnGoat 6y ago
      It has absolutely nothing to do with religion. Just simply right and wrong, stealing is wrong. Stop justifying it and you'll probably stop getting downvoted.
  - nemothekid 6y ago
    >The wikipedia article does not go into that much technical details. Do you have more? Given that the Cisco officer could only talk about strcmp and not something more substantial, I am inclined to believe the story was overblown. It's wikipedia man - that section alone has 8 cited sources. Healthy skepticism is a good thing, but I'm not going to spoonfeed you. >it is not a simple case of just copying your competitor's source code then racing ahead of them with a massive sales team and non-technical economic prowess But this is exactly what happened in Huawei's case. Huawei is known for being cheaper than Cisco and providing way better support than Cisco. It's easy to throw bodies at sales & support when you don't pay R&D. They aren't even ahead of everyone else - Cisco's hardware is still more performant and Ericsson is still more widely deployed. 5G simply provided a new ground where everyone would start from 0. I don't know why you are being downvoted but your questions don't seem relevant. What does it matter that monopolists are going sour grapes? If I steal from you, and use that money to buy a fancy car, and get thrown in jail, will any lawyer use the defense "infinity0 was jealous of my fancy car"?
    - infinity0 6y ago
      I checked the sources - they are either inaccessible or don't go into technical detail, and basically just repeat what the sentence on the wikipedia article says. So no, they are not sufficient to actually get to the details of the case. If you are "familiar" with the case as you claimed, surely you can answer one simple question of mine rather than make me tree-search through all these links? Additionally, I am coming from a background of having the media spew these accusations at me all day without actually backing them up, so I am not inclined to want to tree-search through yet another probably-unsubstantive source being thrown in my face. When your officer mentions "strcmp" on a public blog post, as one of their key examples of "theft", that is extremely telling. > But this is exactly what happened in Huawei's case. [..] providing way better support than Cisco [..] They aren't even ahead of everyone else Providing better support is not helped by copying technology, but you have to train large numbers of non-technical support staff to be competent at supporting that particular technology. Sure "ahead" depends on your measure, but they are certainly ahead in some key areas such as coverage. > If I steal from you, and use that money to buy a fancy car Stealing money is different from copying technology. If I steal your money, you no longer have the money. But if I copy your technology, you still have the technology. By the time it takes me to understand your technology, you have had enough time to innovate further upon it. So attributing Huawei's success primarily to this, is extremely biased. Given than there have been much more substantial lawsuits with widely-covered technical evidence (Apple vs Samsung, Google vs Oracle) as well as heavier fines involved, I cannot put any strong belief in these Huawei accusations. Huawei being singled out for something less substantive than what other companies have already done, this stinks of some sort of prejudice, and anyone reasonable can see this. If it's not racism, it is ideological - that a company from a country run on an entirely different set of principles, is doing as good or better than you.

nemothekid 6y ago

I'm sorry I didn't analyze the source too hard before selecting. I'm only really familiar with Huawei's and Cisco's patent troubles (summarized on Wikipedia here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Huawei#Cisco_patent_lawsuit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Huawei#Cisco_pate...)

infinity0 6y ago
The wikipedia article does not go into that much technical details. Do you have more? Given that the Cisco officer could only talk about strcmp and not something more substantial, I am inclined to believe the story was overblown. On a separate note, I think the biggest most obvious question that any accuser has to answer is, if Huawei copied so much significant material, why are they ahead of everyone else? It takes time to digest copied technology, it is not a simple case of just copying your competitor's source code then racing ahead of them with a massive sales team and non-technical economic prowess. Given that intellectual property laws were constructed to (supposedly) encourage innovation, even if Huawei did get to where they are now by copying, doesn't that suggest that in fact it's a good thing, they have brought all this extra innovative technology to the world? Or are the monopolists simply going sour grapes because they are no longer at the the forefront?
- infinity0 6y ago
  Typical anonymous cowards at hacker news, downvoting without the guts or intellect to actually defend their own religious ideologies.
  - mtnGoat 6y ago
    It has absolutely nothing to do with religion. Just simply right and wrong, stealing is wrong. Stop justifying it and you'll probably stop getting downvoted.
- nemothekid 6y ago
  >The wikipedia article does not go into that much technical details. Do you have more? Given that the Cisco officer could only talk about strcmp and not something more substantial, I am inclined to believe the story was overblown. It's wikipedia man - that section alone has 8 cited sources. Healthy skepticism is a good thing, but I'm not going to spoonfeed you. >it is not a simple case of just copying your competitor's source code then racing ahead of them with a massive sales team and non-technical economic prowess But this is exactly what happened in Huawei's case. Huawei is known for being cheaper than Cisco and providing way better support than Cisco. It's easy to throw bodies at sales & support when you don't pay R&D. They aren't even ahead of everyone else - Cisco's hardware is still more performant and Ericsson is still more widely deployed. 5G simply provided a new ground where everyone would start from 0. I don't know why you are being downvoted but your questions don't seem relevant. What does it matter that monopolists are going sour grapes? If I steal from you, and use that money to buy a fancy car, and get thrown in jail, will any lawyer use the defense "infinity0 was jealous of my fancy car"?
  - infinity0 6y ago
    I checked the sources - they are either inaccessible or don't go into technical detail, and basically just repeat what the sentence on the wikipedia article says. So no, they are not sufficient to actually get to the details of the case. If you are "familiar" with the case as you claimed, surely you can answer one simple question of mine rather than make me tree-search through all these links? Additionally, I am coming from a background of having the media spew these accusations at me all day without actually backing them up, so I am not inclined to want to tree-search through yet another probably-unsubstantive source being thrown in my face. When your officer mentions "strcmp" on a public blog post, as one of their key examples of "theft", that is extremely telling. > But this is exactly what happened in Huawei's case. [..] providing way better support than Cisco [..] They aren't even ahead of everyone else Providing better support is not helped by copying technology, but you have to train large numbers of non-technical support staff to be competent at supporting that particular technology. Sure "ahead" depends on your measure, but they are certainly ahead in some key areas such as coverage. > If I steal from you, and use that money to buy a fancy car Stealing money is different from copying technology. If I steal your money, you no longer have the money. But if I copy your technology, you still have the technology. By the time it takes me to understand your technology, you have had enough time to innovate further upon it. So attributing Huawei's success primarily to this, is extremely biased. Given than there have been much more substantial lawsuits with widely-covered technical evidence (Apple vs Samsung, Google vs Oracle) as well as heavier fines involved, I cannot put any strong belief in these Huawei accusations. Huawei being singled out for something less substantive than what other companies have already done, this stinks of some sort of prejudice, and anyone reasonable can see this. If it's not racism, it is ideological - that a company from a country run on an entirely different set of principles, is doing as good or better than you.