Slashdot Mirror
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.
They won't think twice. They've already considered the risk case and built the probable legal loss into the cost of the product.
The only way to even dream of making companies not do this is to make the decision makers and eventually the shareholders liable for crimes against humanity personally, without the possibility of the corporation buying off the government as they do for such things now.
Of course the government in question is broke and corrupt to the point where turning away billions in bribes (sorry I mean legal penalties) won't even occur, never mind actually happening.
blindly antisocialist = antisocial
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.
I'm a dreamer, the world is my playpen. But hey, I'm a serious person, I can't dream all the time.
I'm still trying to figure out which part of this was illegal at all.
Donewe torture people too? Was their specific type of torture illegal? They tortured people they considered to be a threat. We torture people we consider to be a threat. Think we need to stop doing something before we judge others for the same behavior.
What's next?
Next up, they should sue Booz Allen (Snowden's employer) for violating the rights of millions of Americans, along with any other corporation that sold goods or services to the NSA/CIA/FBI/TSA.
Let's make a trade. We'll agree that Cisco is a money grubbing enterprise that doesn't have a soul and is a sellout in exchange for not having that )(!@)#! Shen Yun crap every year.
Deal?
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
If the car was built with a human targeting device that makes running people over easier, yes. If the knife was built and sold with the idea of stabbing the spouse, yes. on and on... This was a system designed to target humans, it was sold as a weapon. The world shield is in the name of the product, shield is a weapon as much as a defensive device.
We could ask what your point is as well. So we should go to war with China because of their atrocities, yet Cisco did absolutely nothing wrong by helping them?
They probably like the json license. Its disliked in the whole free software and open source community, not even google likes it even though its infamous clause sounds so similar to their former motto.
It's endless. There will always be people who demand money because of some grievance or another. Because actually earning money is much more difficult than telling a sob story.
The question is, why should the rest of us keep going along with the endless demands? Because we think someday it will be our turn to get a big unearned payday? Because ... envy?
Where do you draw the line though? Can we add the people who provided materials to build and create Guantanamo bay to the list of companies that should be punished, the people who make the navigation software used in aircraft performing extraordinary renditions...
I want to know that Cisco knowingly produced products for this purpose and it influences my view on the company, but that's a long way from thinking they should have criminal liability for it.
I think Cisco acted legally for the country they were in.
If you want to boycott them that's fine but there's no basis (and total hubris) for suing them for their China subsidiary's actions for breaking US laws.
Perhaps you'd like to go after them for not paying California's minimum wage laws in China?
No, no. Your moral righteousness is absolute.
I'd sort of agree with you. Cisco shouldn't be criticiszed for selling communications equipment to China. The evidence is plain, what better way to lift people from under oppressive regimes than communucations.
But, from TFA:
Cisco built an extensive law-enforcement system for the Chinese government beginning in 1999, called the "Golden Shield" or "Great Firewall."
Cisco built the fucking Great Firewall of China!
They deserve everything they can get, and more. And I don't mean profits now.
If someone comes to you and says "I need you to sell me a system which we can use to track and arrest dissidents", you can't claim you had no idea of what it was being used for.
Companies routinely sell to nations with the fill knowledge the purpose of the technology isn't entirely benign.
In fact, according to TFA, there is a law on the books called the Alien Tort Law which specifically says you can't do this without consequences.
This is nothing at all like suing Ford because of the actions of a driver. Because in this case Cisco was likely an active participant.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Is it "freedom" to try to tell Cisco -- retroactively -- who they can and can't do business with? Shouldn't Cisco be free to sell electronic equipment to whomever will pay? Should Cisco be neutral and sell to everyone, or should Cisco discriminate? Why is this any of this the EFF's business at all?
If someone comes to you and says "I need you to sell me a system which we can use to track and arrest dissidents"
What if someone wants to buy shoes "so they can track and arrest dissidents"? Or lunch so they can keep up their dissident-tracking strength?
I guess selling shoes or food is wrong too? But it only matters if there's a way to get a big unearned payday from the shoe-seller. No payday, no moral outrage.
At least we'd have the proper venue. Ithink some sort of corrective action should be taken with Cisco, but suing in a U.S. jurisdiction is not the proper venue nor is it the way to achieve a positive result.
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.
Denying countries the tools they need to commit human rights violations is not a new tactic. Even if the lawsuits fail, companies have been named and shamed. This is quite effective a lot of the time. The US has performed far fewer lethal injection executions after the EU named and shamed the companies that make the drugs. It wasn't worth the bad publicity for a tiny part of their business.
It will be interesting to see how Cisco responds. Supplying large and presumably very expensive IT systems to the Chinese government is probably a much larger business than 100 or so doses of specialized drugs that have no other good uses. It may be worth it to Cisco to try to weather the PR storm.
Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
Perhaps you'd like to go after them for not paying California's minimum wage laws in China?
No, no. Your moral righteousness is absolute.
Are you really going to use the "countries have the right to set their own laws" argument in a torture-genocide case? Because I don't think you'll find it hard to find moral absolutes in that area.
What if someone wants to buy shoes "so they can track and arrest dissidents"? Or lunch so they can keep up their dissident-tracking strength?
If the shoes are specifically made to facilitate your dissident tracking efforts, yes. Otherwise, no.
That's the point in judging moral behavior. Knowledge and intent, matter.
Yes. Sovereign nations do, in fact, have the right to set their own laws.
So how are you going to stop them from committing atrocities?
Oh yeah, that's right... WAR.
Do you want to pay that cost for your moral absolutism? No? Huh, imagine that, your moral absolutism has limits.
So you want to go the Iran/Iraq route with harsh economic sanctions? Well... that deprives those citizens of healthcare and food... tantamount to torture by some definitions. We've also seen the results - North Korea, Iran, Cuba are all still here and their governments still firmly in control.
Right, better to just sue Cisco and feel like you're "doing" something than actually solve the problem.
W and Dick got off the hook. Why should elected officials have a different standard than CEOs?
I was hoping Bernie S. would have the gonads to re-open those investigations.
Table-ized A.I.
That's the point in judging moral behavior. Knowledge and intent, matter.
But getting a big unearned payday from suing is what really matters.
does that go for all the weapons sales too?
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.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
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?
YES - if the seller knew that the car or knife was going to be used for murder in advance. Common murderers doesn't usually state their intention up front. But if someone buy a car "for running over annoying neighbours" or "the best knife for slaying children age 8-12" - then you better not be part of it.
The local water company gets sued when someone drowns someone in a bath tub, because after all, the water company provided the water....
Well, if they supply water to someone's "people-drowning plant" they might be in trouble.
Similiarly, this is the reason why many countries won't sell weapons to non-allied countries engaged in a war - or why Europe won't sell certain poisons to U.S. prisons. You are responsible for providing the tools for illegal/immoral activity - if you know up front what's going on.
So how are you going to stop them from committing atrocities?Oh yeah, that's right... WAR.
Cisco isn't China.
Do you want to pay that cost for your moral absolutism?
Closing Cisco has a pretty little cost.
your moral absolutism has limits.
No. It doesn't. Its consequences may have, but that doesn't make them wrong.
Right, better to just sue Cisco and feel like you're "doing" something than actually solve the problem.
So... If we can't stop death, there's no point in having medics? If we can't have a government that represents us all, better not to have any government?
I think the one who has a problem with absolutes is you.
I can certainly decide it's a good idea to harm Cisco while accepting we won't be transforming China into a democratic utopia.
Chase down dissident's like never before with new Air Zedongs!
Tired of dissidents escaping around street corners while chasing them thru the crowed streets of Beijing? If only you had just a little more speed you could knab those bastards. Have you stooped to tie you shoes only to look up and see the dissident you've spent the entire afternoon tailing has run off. The Air Zedongs feature stylish Velcro straps that always remain securely fixed until you release them! Power no longer flows from the gun barrel but springs from the soul of your feet when you ware the all new Air Zedongs!
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Well being that you on the Internet the chances are rather good that you are Using a product that is partially or completely manufactured in China.
Every dollar you spend on these goods will help fund China and allow them to continue their evil ways.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Yup it's their right it's also our right to got to war anex the country and "fix" the issue. Neither is a great fix both have huge issues. The rule of law is only effective if you have the guns to back it up.
No sir I dont like it.
If Ford/Ginsu sold the car/knife to the individual with the full knowledge of what would happen...then yes.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
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.
And what Cisco did is the equivalent of the car salesman instead responding with "I can get you just the thing for that! We can customize this SUV with bludgeoning metal bars on the front, lacerating blades underneath, and a targeting system to keep track of her if she tries to escape!" And sadly that was legal in the prospective buyers' jurisdiction...
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
so your stance is "since they're going to do it anyway, why not make a buck in it, and btw, you cant hold me responsible for what they did, even though I enabled it"
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
You're right, of course. China's laws and the laws of Western countries would be in conflict here. We can't impose the rule of law on them, but a Western-based company knowingly supporting this sort of thing is wrong. If we're going to say that China is wrong and we're right, we need a solid premise beyond just invoking the term 'Human Rights' from which to argue. Then we could argue that sanctioning Cisco is an appropriate response.
unless of course you're being held by US authorities in Gitmo, or been extraordinarily renditioned to Afghanistan, Syria, Egypt, or another fantastic vacation locale.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
Ah, except the US has conveniently said "but this isn't torture, it's enhanced interrogation" for the stuff they do.
Awesome, isn't it?
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
World leaders continued to queue up to lead trade delegations to China to grab more business.
Once there, they will make brief, carefully stage-managed comments about "human rights" before getting right back down to business.
Back home, they might meet the Dali Lama in between negotiations about selling-off the latest piece of the nation's infrastructure.
What a cynical pantomime.
Meanwhile, our "friends" in China continue to prop-up the North Korean regime, and are so emboldened by Western inaction that they are now snatching dissidents off the street in Hong Kong and taking them to the mainland for *ahem* "questioning". So much for the "one country, two systems" promises.
No wonder the Taiwanese just kicked-out the KMT (who lost power for the first time EVER) for being too pro-China and "reunification".
The voters have seen the end of that film in Tibet and HK...
Oh yeah, and financed by us shipping all our manufacturing base and jobs out there, they're now constructing their own aircraft carrier, that's in addition to building and fortifying artificial islands in the South China Sea. No red flags!
So yes, let's continue to make a buck and help them out!
The fact that the SJW's don't like what China is doing.
You want to decide what's legal? Start your own country.
Well if you actually READ one of the links in the summary you'd have found out the lawsuit is in respect to violation of a US law specifically designed to stop someone doing something in the US that they know will lead to human rights abuses in other countries. I would actually think this could be extremely hard to prove, not impossible, but hard. But the real point is the law exists in the US so the idea is that Cisco broke US laws.
Your reading comprehension skills are absolute....
What if the software and systems used were open source?
Most of us probably know that IBM sold computers to Nazi Germany which were used to help keep track of stuff in their concentration. IBM knew what was going on there as Cisco knew what it was doing here. All for a buck. Trouble is, it's hard to claim to be a country that stands behind human rights while at the same time helping people specifically violate those rights. Knowing China tortures people it doesn't like, it's clear social responsibility goes out the window when it comes to profit.Yahoo gave their search engine saying "it's the law in China" around 2004 leading to the torture of 2 reporters (if my memory is correct). At a Foreign Affairs committee they got blasted by the leader, Tom Lantos (rightfully so in my opinion). The problem is, when you do business with a country that is well known to act in was contrary to what we consider ethical/moral this is inevitable. So why do we still do it? Because convenience is more valuable to us than our sense of morality. People would scream about not having their "cheap Chinese underwear" if we stopped trading with them on moral grounds. (As if we'd ever entertain doing this). If people want this to change we have to vote with ourr minds, hearts and dollars. Something we all seem to forget as we say, "shame on you" and then buy our products from people we know do things we public denounce. Something to ponder on...
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" - Einstein
You don't get it... This is not about whether or not China is going to stop torturing their people, but it is about who assists them to do so. If the person who assists them is not from the US, then the US wouldn't have this legal issue with because it will be up to the person's nation to do so.
Cisco is an American company ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... ). Because US laws are against torturing, the citizen of the country should NOT assist others, regardless from where on the earth, to do so. Even worse, in this case, Cisco have the knowledge of what the system is going to be used for...
Good, there is no place for religion in a civilized world.
If we're going to talk about massive electronics companies that have done things they shouldn't years ago why not hold IBM accountable too? Godwin's law would be disappointed if no one mentioned it.
Personally I think expecting massive corps that operate exclusively for the short term benefit of their shareholders to not lie cheat and steal and otherwise act badly to increase short term profits is like expecting a politician to not be influenced by lobbying. (that's what we call legalized bribery here in the US).
sirus xm merger
alltel verizon merger
att direct tv merger
VW emissions cheating
Apple price fixing, attacking realplayer with drm.
Sony rootkits.
Need I go on? They are quite happy to screw you over if it makes them an extra 10 cents at the end of the year.
It's more of a systemic problem they are setup to work this way. As they are most often run by the numbers alone.
Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
Yes. Sovereign nations do, in fact, have the right to set their own laws.
So how are you going to stop them from committing atrocities?
Oh yeah, that's right... WAR.
Modern countries have developed many other methods for dealing with these sorts of situations. While they are sometimes not as fast or effective as WAR, they don't generally have the side affect of killing thousands or millions of innocents. If you want to live in the past, you'll first have to wait for the future to invent your time machine.
Ideology: A tool used primarily to avoid the bother of thinking.
I don't think IBM was ever punished for working with a certain Hollerith card customer of theirs in 1930s Germany.
Wouldn't this apply to Google or pretty much any company too? If they provide search information to the government who then rounds up people who later disappear or aren't allowed to have children, or whatever....
Chance favors the prepared mind.
Perfect is the enemy of good.
I'm sure if you keep repeating this enough times without providing any reason that you believe the allegations are false, it'll be true!
Do you have some problem with bringing the accused to court and if found guilty punishing them? Why do you believe criminals shouldn't be punished?
Do you have a problem with the appeals process? Do you think everything a judge says should be final and forever binding, written in stone? Do you think judges are infallible? Are you arguing we should get rid of the appeals system all together?
I'm perplexed, to say the least.
You have to look at what they knew. If they could reasonably have assumed that the US wouldn't torture people, then okay. But if the US asked them to build a waterboarding facility with that specific purpose, then they should pay for doing it.
Cisco knew what was happening and aided those who were doing it.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
It's tangential to the core issue here, but interesting to read. Aliens and ghosts, claims of levitation and healing powers. http://content.time.com/time/w...
Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.
The difference is in the intended use. It's one thing to sell items that are for a general purpose, it's another to sell something with an explicit purpose. For instance, shoes isn't a big deal, unless the contract explicitly states something like that the shoes should have spikes for stomping dissidents in the head. If Cisco sold routers to the Chinese government, and the Chinese government used them for whatever, that's not necessarily Cisco's fault.
If on the other hand, China asked Cisco "Hey, what can you do for us to help us deal with squashing these dissidents and such?" and Cisco responded with a whole list of things they could do, and then were paid to do it, that's entirely different.
I hate it when companies say, "We like to think that our presence in China is helping to spread democracy there." Nope - not if the company is helping the Chinese government repress people.
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.
I hope someone will compile a list of these companies and technologies, and and I hope this list is widely publicized. Boycotts and/or congressional actions against these sales might result from the list.
Which one? I think maybe part of the reason that Slashdot is known for not reading the articles is that they get a bunch of links thrown at them in a summary.
No, the CEO and the board do NOT have a corporate shield. The corporate shield protects the minority stockholders. There is, however, a very strong legal tradition that the board and CEO not be charged for the crimes they have knowingly committed. Occasionally they will allow some lesser worker of the corporation to be charged and convicted as a scapegoat. Often that person was also guilty of the same crimes, but to convict both him and those of his superiors who ordered the illegal action would lead to conspiracy charges, and nobody wants to charge the CEO of a major corporation with conspiracy.
The law is two things:
1) The stuff it actually says, and
2) The way that stuff is actually interpreted and applied.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
This isn't retroactive. That law's been on the books since the 1950's, or maybe the 40's.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
And your point is?
If Cisco didn't do it would the Chinese have stopped the torture and killing?
If you and the EFF feel this strongly about it maybe you should support war against China to stop the people actually DOING the torture to begin with.
What, "so it's going to happen anyway, we might as well partake in the torture."
When you support a torturer, that enables more torture. China doesn't want to be a pariah, they don't want to become politically isolated again. They love being able to have their cake and eat it too, having cozy relationships with Western companies while repressing their people. In that position, no one else has any leverage to affect change.
Why is it that you offer only two extremes: all out war or being completely complicit and supportive of torture?
a) No, companies should not be off the hook for selling to the US government in violation of US law. Now show that that happened.
b) The law that Cisco is charged with violating dates back to at least the early 1950's. And it is a specific US law, which doesn't apply to the US government (though it arguably should).
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Really? You think China's torturing of their citizens or building better network systems to torture their citizens will STOP if you shut Cisco down?
And, again with your hubris, the US is the United States government, not the United Federation of Earth (or even the United Nations for that matter of which China has a position on the UN Human rights board. Imagine that!)
Yeah, China's position on the Human Rights board shows how much of a joke the HR board really is.
And Cisco is a US-based company. I don't give a shit whether it's a "chinese subsidiary" of Cisco or not, it's an American company and it's about time some of these bad actors get to pay the piper. If they insist they have to sell to and actively abet torturers, fine, they can leave the US, but if they want to be an American company, they can reap the drawbacks of that as well as the advantages.
Donewe torture people too? Was their specific type of torture illegal? They tortured people they considered to be a threat. We torture people we consider to be a threat. Think we need to stop doing something before we judge others for the same behavior.
Agreed, and I fully support the prosecution of those in the US who enabled, supported, and committed US torture as well.
Cisco have a track record. This is not the first situation like this.
A classic example is sending security guards in to drag a guy out of a courtroom in Seattle while the hearing was in session - how's that for contempt for people and the laws that are supposed to protect them?
Do you have any links to articles that claim that Falun Gong practitioners are trying to overthrow the government? According to Wikipedia, this group of people is persecuted
due to its size, independence from the state, and spiritual teachings. ... Tensions culminated in April 1999, when over 10,000 Falun Gong practitioners gathered peacefully near the central government compound in Beijing to request legal recognition and freedom from state interference. This demonstration is widely seen as catalyzing the persecution that followed.
The article claims that thousands have died in custody.
If that's true, then I don't care if their beliefs are religious, secular or a cult. I don't care if the beliefs are true or total nonsense. The Chinese government has no right to imprison, torture and kill them. Just leave them alone.
Why only human rights abuse and not general criminality? Besides which the definition you are using is effectively pointless. If that was the law then China could have either been less open about their intentions, or if that wasn't enough they could have bought them through an intermediary.
cool story bro.
except this wasn't "investigation and interrogation by typical American law enforcement".
it was torture. conducted by the CIA, and/or foreign proxies, such as the extraordinary rendition (re: kidnapping) of ~3000 persons, some US citizens, some citizens of US allies, several of whom were cases of mistaken identity, yet tortured for months before being released without apology or acknowledgement of wrong doing.
it was torture. cut and dry.
you should take your own advice about dealing in facts,
but your post history and reputation show that doesn't really interest you.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
And who's going to stop them? Try joining Falun Gong and move to china.
Poor A/C from China, do you want some cheese with that wine?
Do you have some problem with bringing the accused to court and if found guilty punishing them? Why do you believe criminals shouldn't be punished?
Why should money change hands? Why should someone who has earned nothing and done nothing of value for anyone get a big payday? How did punishing the guilty turn into rewarding lawyers and grievance activists?