Slashdot Mirror


Chinese Man Gets 30 Months For Fake Cisco Sales

alphadogg writes "A Chinese man was sentenced to two-and-a-half years in a US prison this week for trafficking in counterfeit Cisco Systems gear. Yongcai Li, 33, will also have to pay the networking company nearly $800,000 in restitution after being the conduit for hundreds of thousands of dollars' worth of counterfeit computer hardware, the FBI said Friday. Prosecutors said he procured the fake gear in China and then sent it to co-conspirators in the US. His alleged co-conspirators have not been charged. Li was arrested by FBI agents on Jan. 9, 2009, in Las Vegas — while the annual Consumer Electronics Show was taking place there. Two years ago, the FBI claimed to have seized more than $78 million worth of counterfeit equipment in more than 400 seizures."

27 of 161 comments (clear)

  1. Excuse me, editors? by Snover · · Score: 3, Informative

    2.5 years is not 30 years, it’s 30 months.

    --

    [insert witty comment here]
    1. Re:Excuse me, editors? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      You may be new here.

    2. Re:Excuse me, editors? by syousef · · Score: 5, Funny

      2.5 years is not 30 years, it’s 30 months.

      I'd hate to see how long kdawson is gone when he takes his 30 minute lunch break.

      Boss: it was a 30 minute break. You were gone a month!!!
      kdawson: Yeah I always get small details like that mixed up. I thought you said months. Sorry.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    3. Re:Excuse me, editors? by Ron+Bennett · · Score: 4, Interesting

      And with good behavior, it could be low as ~25 months.

      IMHO, a tad over 2 years prison sentence is a relatively *small* risk, compared to say illicit drug sales, for huge financial rewards ... this may actually *encourage* some to get into selling counterfeit electronics.

      Ron

    4. Re:Excuse me, editors? by Penguinshit · · Score: 5, Funny

      Wasn't kdawson part of NASA's Mars team a while back?

    5. Re:Excuse me, editors? by Pharmboy · · Score: 4, Funny

      Maybe 2.5 U.S. years is actually 30 metric years?

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
  2. Bastards by socceroos · · Score: 4, Insightful

    His alleged co-conspirators have not been charged.

    And why not? These guys should be getting just as much time as the other dude.

    1. Re:Bastards by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Because its quite hard to prove it. For all we know he was selling them as legitimate Cisco products. If someone said that they bought wholesale Cisco consumer-grade routers and you owned a small electronics shop and could sell them for $10 profit, and the person looked legitimate most people would buy them.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    2. Re:Bastards by Yaa+101 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      For people outside the US, this whole cutting deals and plead bargain stuff reads like, the whole system of justice is corrupt to the bone by design.

    3. Re:Bastards by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Outside the US"? You don't think it happens elsewhere? What do you think informing on your neighbors is all about?

  3. Good thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Good thing he didn't download a music album instead. He might of ended up with 3 times that fee.

  4. Signals little for Google et. al. by JoshuaZ · · Score: 5, Interesting

    China has apparently decided to get stricter about dealing with counterfeits. This may signal that China is more willing to cooperate with other countries and large corporations. However, as China produces more and more of its own goods, it has a direct economic incentive to cooperate with counterfeiting issues since that will encourage reciprocal behavior in other countries. Moreover, according to TFA, the FBI and the US government in general have been trying in particular to deal with counterfeit Cisco products. So this still took lots of pressure and activity. And Cisco does a lot of business in China, so that's yet another reason China might crack down in a case like this. This thus isn't similar to a situation like that with Google that fits in with China's broader policies on censorship and how it runs its political system. It shouldn't be surprising that China will occasionally cooperate when it has a direct economic incentive and doesn't risk tainting its people with democracy or free speech.

    1. Re:Signals little for Google et. al. by fluffy99 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The only reason the Chinese govt got involved was pressure from the FBI. The only reason the FBI got involved is that some of those fake Cisco routers had a modified IOS with a backdoor password. I have a suspicion that the Chinese govt was actually involved in selling the compromised counterfeit equipment.

      This and many other examples, are why the security specialists highly recommend formatting any new computers or equipment and installing fresh software/firmware from a known good source.

    2. Re:Signals little for Google et. al. by pipedwho · · Score: 3, Interesting

      There's a difference between a counterfeit and just copying something.

      Counterfeiting is generally bad, because even within China, people need to know if what they're buying is legit. I'm sure even the Chinese government doesn't want to buy a piece of equipment that is an inferior copy rebadged with the name and product ID of something reputable (eg. Cisco).

      Whereas, copying an item so it's identical, but just rebadging it with your own name (eg. Siskow) is only an affront to the legalities of patents and copyright. At half the price, I'm sure the Chinese would be happy to buy your Siskow product.

      On the one hand you have fraud (or at best a trademark violation), on the other you have patent/copyright infringement.

  5. What constitutes "fake" hardware? by Darkness404 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The question is, what counts as counterfeit hardware? Is he taking, say "genuine" Cisco hardware (as in, made in the same factory just not with the Cisco name on it) and selling it as real Cisco hardware, is he taking inferior components to make his hardware, is the hardware functional?

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    1. Re:What constitutes "fake" hardware? by Ron+Bennett · · Score: 3, Informative

      Even if the units are coming off the exact same production line (some factories, reportedly, occasionally run extra shifts for counterfeiters), some of the components used may be rejects (ie. functional, but outside of spec; think chip fabs) from the legitimate production run; units not tested as rigorously with minimal quality control.

      With that said, even if the unauthorized units are exactly identical, which in the real world is unlikely to the be the case as I've explained above, in regards to the law, it's still counterfeiting.

      Ron

    2. Re:What constitutes "fake" hardware? by plover · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There's a lot that can go wrong with counterfeit hardware, even if it's made in the same factory. Out-of-spec components can be used in place of the high quality ones originally specified by the Cisco engineers. Cheap lead-based solder could be used with the RoHS label. Speeding up the production process can lead to shoddy workmanship. They probably aren't paying inspectors to check the assemblies. Toxic waste could be dumped in the garbage.

      So not only does this make for a trouble-prone product for the customer, it also costs Cisco extra. A customer who paid for a box labeled Cisco is going to expect the same customer service as one who purchased actual legitimate Cisco hardware. They're going to send the crappy boxes in for warranty replacements on Cisco's nickel. And if the quality is sub-par they're going to be complaining about crappy Cisco hardware when it's not Cisco's fault, affecting their brand image.

      In some cases the counterfeiters are fencing stolen but legitimate merchandise, but in most cases they're producing low-quality knock-offs.

      --
      John
    3. Re:What constitutes "fake" hardware? by tonycheese · · Score: 4, Interesting

      On top of all this, this kind of story will hurt Cisco's brand image as well. Next time you go out to buy something from a small electronics store, you may decide to go with a different brand since you know for a fact that many counterfeit Cisco products have been packaged and sold as the real thing.

    4. Re:What constitutes "fake" hardware? by lanner · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I have some "fake" Cisco WIC cards for the 2600 series here in a couple of routers. I'll tell you that they work just as well as regular Cisco WIC cards, and the systems you install them into can't tell the difference. These have been running reliably for years now.

      Cisco is begging for a counterfeit market for their parts, because they mark up prices to insane levels.

      True, it's the research, development, documentation, and support that makes their products great, but charging what they charge is just stupid.

      Here's an example;

      Intel 2-port 10Gig network card, $2500.00

      http://www.cdw.com/shop/products/default.aspx?EDC=1352161

      Same EXACT card but branded as Cisco costs over $14000.00

      http://www.cdw.com/shop/products/default.aspx?edc=1424619

      Yes, these are the same cards, my company has several of the large ASA firewalls that these go into, and the Intel cards. Sit them side by side and they are identical. At most, different firmware, but I doubt it. I've never actually tried since we can't be dorking around with production equipment.

      Newer Cisco routers and switches are now using licensing for features and ports, so installing non-Cisco-extortion-priced parts won't really be an issue anyway. Reference the 3750-E/3560-E switches and those new 1900/2900/3900 series routers.

    5. Re:What constitutes "fake" hardware? by LordLucless · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So, buy the cheap parts. Selling identical, unbranded hardware isn't a crime (patent issues aside). The Cisco ones come bundled with Cisco support and all that jazz. The problem is when people sell those cheap parts, but claim they are Cisco. People buy them at a higher price because they think they're getting Cisco, and hence, Cisco support. It's that fraud which is the crime.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    6. Re:What constitutes "fake" hardware? by fluffy99 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      And if the quality is sub-par they're going to be complaining about crappy Cisco hardware when it's not Cisco's fault, affecting their brand image.

      All true. Do you know if Cisco is honoring warranties on the counterfeits. Surely when you call in a TAC case, they know from the serial number if it's legitimate or not.

    7. Re:What constitutes "fake" hardware? by rwyoder · · Score: 5, Informative

      So, buy the cheap parts. Selling identical, unbranded hardware isn't a crime (patent issues aside). The Cisco ones come bundled with Cisco support and all that jazz. The problem is when people sell those cheap parts, but claim they are Cisco. People buy them at a higher price because they think they're getting Cisco, and hence, Cisco support. It's that fraud which is the crime.

      Anyone who has purchased Cisco hardware knows that the price does not include support.
      Support is a separate line item that must be added to the purchase order.

    8. Re:What constitutes "fake" hardware? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This. This right fucking here. This is why I don't care if something hurts Cisco. They're bastards on their pricing and turning EVERYTHING in to an extra charge. Read the fine print, read the instructions twice, and keep a good hold of your wallet when you go in to buy Cisco. You are getting in to a product that will probably run you 4-5 times the already overblown up front price tag they initially show you once you get through licenses, support, etc.

      I've started building linux firewalls for small to medium businesses on recycled hardware. Businesses that were seriously considering (and often buy) hugely overpriced Cisco systems that don't really deliver... well... anything for their astronomical price. It works out a helluva lot better, and they never *need* support. Once you get in to enterprise level needs, you should be dealing with Juniper and the like since they actually deliver something amazingly capable for the price. Unlike Cisco.

      Why the hell is Cisco still in business, again?

    9. Re:What constitutes "fake" hardware? by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      ...Or I could get the "genuine" product and end up with a backdoor to the CIA/FBI/etc. Unless you code/solder your devices yourself, you never know what exactly you could be getting.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  6. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Funny

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  7. win win for Cisco by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Farm out production to cheap labor in a country that has little regard for IP. Cisco wins
    Get FBI and US justice department to enforce and foot the bill for counterfeiting under the guise of "National security". Cisco wins

    In both cases, Cisco wins and in all cases the US citizens lose. We foot the bill, lose the jobs, get Chinese made equipment in our government and pay with tax dollars to support Ciscos business decision.

  8. What goes around, comes around by NicknamesAreStupid · · Score: 5, Interesting

    About 13 years ago, the government of China contacted Cisco through its Hong Kong office and said "China has been very good to Cisco. Now it is time for Cisco to be very good to China." They forced Cisco to open factories in China, and China started a company later known as Huawei, run by some army generals. The Internet was becoming a major communications component of their country, both private and government, and they did not like the idea that their infrastructure would be made in America. Once Cisco opened their Chinese factories, someone in China began almost immediately cloning Cisco hardware. I wonder who? The clones were so close that they even had the same bugs.

    Cisco seemed to put up with this for a while, since almost all of the hardware was kept within China. Then, sometime in the last ten years, I can't remember when, Huawei started selling Cisco-like hardware worldwide. At that point, Cisco sued and forced them to stop all international sales of the disputed products. Later, Huawei rewrote its router code and even licensed code from another American company.

    So, what to do with all that surplus manufacturing capacity?