EFF: Cisco Shouldn't Get Off the Hook For Aiding Torture In China (eff.org)

itwbennett writes: In a lawsuit in Northern California that was dismissed in 2014, Falun Gong practitioners alleged that Cisco Systems built a security system, dubbed "Golden Shield," for the Chinese government knowing it would be used to track and persecute members of the religious minority. That case is being appealed, and on Monday the EFF, Privacy International and free-speech group Article 19 filed a brief that supports the appeal. Many U.S. and European companies sell technology to regimes that violate human rights, and if this case goes to trial and Cisco loses, they may think twice, said EFF Staff Attorney Sophia Cope. "In a lot of instances, these companies are selling directly to the government, and they know exactly what is going to be happening," Cope said.

Comments

Re:Normally I side with the EFF, BUT

[Esteanil]

this is just ridiculous.

What's next?

Someone intentionally runs down another person with their car and Ford gets sued?

Ginsu gets sued because some nutso housewife decided to stab her spouse and their spawns?

The local water company gets sued when someone drowns someone in a bath tub, because after all, the water company provided the water....

From TFA:

The Golden Shield system included a library of Falun Gong Internet activity enabling the Chinese government to identify Falun Gong members online, according to the lawsuit. The case also contains strong evidence that Cisco created systems for storing and sharing information about “forced conversion”—i.e. torture—sessions for use as training tools.

The cooperation was also documented in internal marketing literature, where a Cisco engineer described the company’s commitment to China’s security objectives, including the “douzhung” of Falun Gong practitioners. Douzhung is a term describing abuse campaigns against disfavored groups comprising of persecution and torture.

Re:Normally I side with the EFF, BUT

[DarkOx]

I think its a pretty strait forward mens rea question, did you know or should your reasonably have know you were materially contributing to the violation of human rights.

Others have asked should Ford be responsible if you buy a car and run someone over. No clearly not because Ford has no reason to think you want that car for anything besides driving it to work the grocery store and taking a family road trip once in a while. In most cases.

On the other hand if [walk] into the dealer the first thing you ask is "Show me something I can run over my ex-girlfriend with tonight" maybe someone ought to make a phone call, and not sell you a car just then.

Same thing with guns. The manufacture has no reason to think you want the weapon for anything other than shooting sports, or self defense. So that fines.

I would not expect the any liability to go to the fold providing materials for the construction of GitMo either. The US military has plenty of legitimate applications for wire fence, concrete, dry wall, coffee makers, etc. There was no reason to think as a contract building a prison it was going to be used as a torture facility.

Cisco on the other hand knows exactly China was going to use the gear for. They practically told them as much, from what I have read. There have been plenty of past cases where equipment was used that way.