Nokia Siemens Sued For Providing Monitoring Equipment To Iran

Just over a year ago, we found out that Nokia Siemens provided internet monitoring equipment to Iran. Now, reader Tootech sends in news that the company is being sued by an Iranian journalist who was captured with the help of that equipment. From El Reg: "Isa Saharkhiz went into hiding following Iran's 2009 presidential elections, after publishing an article branding the Grand Ayatollah as a hypocrite who was primarily responsible for vote tallies widely regarded as being fraudulent. According to a complaint filed in federal court in Virginia, officials with the Ministry of Intelligence and Security in Iran tracked him down with the help of cellphone-monitoring devices and other eavesdropping gear provided by Nokia Siemens. 'Defendants knowingly and willingly delivered very capable and sophisticated equipment for unlawful intercepting, monitoring, and filtering of electronic communications ("Intelligence Solutions") to Iranian officials,' the complaint alleged. ... According to the document, Saharkhiz has been severely tortured since his arrest. He was held in solitary confinement for more than 80 days, and his ribs were broken in a struggle during his arrest. The complaint said it may be amended to add as many as 1,500 other political prisoners who are being held under similar circumstances. Additional defendants may also be added."

Comments

Law?

[Jedi Alec]

'Defendants knowingly and willingly delivered very capable and sophisticated equipment for unlawful intercepting, monitoring, and filtering of electronic communications ("Intelligence Solutions") to Iranian officials,' the complaint alleged.

Not to diminish in any way what this journalist has been through...unlawful where exactly? Iran or the US?

Sounds a bit like suing Heckler and Koch because they sold a gun to the government that provided it to the cop that used it to shoot you when the situation didn't warrant it.

Re:Law?

[maroberts]

unlawful where exactly? Iran or the US?

I agree that this a question of where it is unlawful and may be a case of forum shopping, however certain countries have sanctions on what can be exported to other countries, a classic example being the USA restricting what can be exported to Cuba. A breach of this can be an offence if the country from where the equipment was sourced has such sanctions in place, or the corporate headquarters is in such a country.

Re:Law?

[Nadaka]

Its not even that. Our great grandparents made a bonehead mistake 60 years ago by overthrowing Iran.

The US has some shitty policy and has for a long time, but we are not as much of theocratic, totalitarian, oppressive, surveilance state as Iran is.

We need to do way better than we are, but on no measure can I say that Iran has any moral superiority.

Forum shopping?

[jrumney]

Not that I'm defending Siemens and Nokia for providing spy equipment to a regime known to torture and kill its citizens for exercising political speech, but how exactly does a court in Virginia have jurisdiction over German and Swedish companies for civil damages allegedly sustained in Iran against an Iranian citizen?

Re:Forum shopping?

[cappp]

It's called the Alien Tort Statute and states that

The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States.

. A few countries establish their own rights to hear international claims, known as universal jurisdiction - thats claimed by the UK, France, Canada, and Australia for instance. I'm sure there's some nuance in the difference between Universal Jurisdiction and that created under the Alien Tort Statute that I don't know, but at it's essentially the same thing. The cases heard tend to relate to human rights issues. The Supreme Court in Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain reiterated their commitment to a test that considers international norms that are "specific, universal, and obligatory" but that's lead to it's own bundle of questions.

Short answer, yup they can.

Re:Because they can

[c0lo]

I'm so confused.

Relax, cool down. Nokia-Siemens sold them because every government asks them to; and providing what your customers want is good for business:

"Western governments, including the UK, don't allow you to build networks without having this functionality."

They all do it!

[bre_dnd]

Don't be naive. Every single telecommunications vendor has tapping capability built into their equipment. Every western government *mandates* that this functionality is built in. It is not the equipment manufacturer who is morally wrong here. If you think it's wrong in Iran, it's wrong in the US or Europe too.

Re:Because they can

[dunkelfalke]

Well, the US has managed to do it to a Finnish company, so there.

"Lawful Intercept" is required

[Terje Mathisen]

You are totally right: The LI (Lawful Intercept) interface is a required part of all relevant telecomms standards, i.e. you cannot manufacture/sell a GSM/3G/LTE setup which doesn't have that LI interface.

Terje
(Currently working on the architecture of a large national cell phone network.)

Re:Legal wranglings

[Zironic]

I sometimes wonder if the lawyers on both sides of a legal conflict have secret meetings about how to get as much money as possible out of their clients.