Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Micron Chip Sales Banned In China On Patent Case (bloomberg.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the trade-disputes dept.

A Chinese court temporarily banned Micron Technology chip sales, cutting the U.S. company off from the world's largest semiconductor market. The news comes from Taiwanese rival United Microelectronics Corporation (UMC). Bloomberg reports: In a patent ruling in favor of UMC, the Fuzhou Intermediate Peopleâ(TM)s Court of the Peopleâ(TM)s Republic of China issued a preliminary injunction stopping Micron from selling 26 products, including dynamic random access memory and Nand flash memory-related products, UMC said in a statement Tuesday. Micron said it hasnâ(TM)t been served with the injunction and wonâ(TM)t comment until it does.

The case is part of a broader dispute between the two companies centering on accusations that UMC acted as a conduit for the theft of Micronâ(TM)s designs in an attempt to help China grow its domestic chip industry and replace imports that rival oil in total value. A Chinese antitrust regulator is already investigating Micron and its Korean rivals, the companies have said. Local media has reported that authorities are looking into increases in chip prices.

33 of 74 comments (clear)

  1. And this... by GerryGilmore · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...is exactly why - in the same way that a broken clock is right twice a day - Trump is correct to start tightening the screws on China.
    Granted, it's about 30 years too late, but....

    1. Re:And this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And what EXACTLY would be a way of going about it all right? We've tried court orders, we've tried asking politely, we've tried everything imaginable and China has laughed while stealing intellectual property from American businesses and destroying American jobs. It was time to stand up the international criminals in China. Trump did that. I don't love the guy by any means, but what he did needed to be done and, as GerryGillmore said, it should have been done 30 years ago.

    2. Re:And this... by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 2

      Actually, Trump has it backwards.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    3. Re:And this... by snapsnap · · Score: 1

      Which is why I always order from crucial.com. They've always accepted returns quickly unlike amazon.com or dell.com. Just sucks paying over twice as much from Dell when they send us memory sticks that don't work. You'd think they would know what memory would work on their own servers.

    4. Re:And this... by greenwow · · Score: 1

      Even on our Dell servers under support contracts, crucial offers memory upgrades that work more often than even Dell. That is why we buy from crucial. Even with so-called next day support, it sometimes takes us weeks or even months to get Dell to dispatch. Crucial will usually work and even sometimes send out other memory DIMMs that work well before we could get Dell to honor their so-called next day support.

    5. Re:And this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Intelectual Property is not property, its privilege granted by State.
      You cannot grant that privilige outside your jurisdictation.
      Stealing IP of US is criminal only in your fantasy.

    6. Re:And this... by lkcl · · Score: 1, Insightful

      And what EXACTLY would be a way of going about it all right? We've tried court orders, we've tried asking politely, we've tried everything imaginable and China has laughed while stealing intellectual property from American businesses and destroying American jobs. It was time to stand up the international criminals in China. Trump did that. I don't love the guy by any means, but what he did needed to be done and, as GerryGillmore said, it should have been done 30 years ago.

      so... i've been reading this quuite a lot recently http://www.crnhq.org/12-Skills... because of an ongoing situation on the riscv mailing lists. what all that stuff on crnhq tells me is that it's best to look for win-win situations. not to try to prove yourself right by making other people look wrong, for example.

      world-wide, trade for basic goods right the way to high-tech goods is critically dependent on china. we did that to ourselves, world-wide, no excuses, by buying goods based on price instead of loyalty to our own country. the only real big exception that i know of to that rule in america is the Ford Mustang. look up the story behind the Ford Probe (aka the Mazda MX3). that was supposed to be the 1990s Mustang.

      now look at how large China is, in terms of population. you think they have it easy? you think 1.3 going on 1.4 billion people can be kept under control through "democracy"?? you're deluding yourself if you think that "mob rule" is a good idea for keeping that many people under control. they keep people under control by making sure that they're kept busy, kept occupied in factories that any other country in their right mind would automate.

      now take a look at how a self-righteous US perspective "y'all stealing our shit" might pan out, given the above context. what's the first and foremost priority of any Chinese Strategic decision-maker? keeping their citizens occupied so that they don't riot, such that they have to start an international war to take their minds off of killing each other with civil war instead, isn't it? that's their top priority, isn't it?

      and we have some fucking idiot president in the USA who, just like you, anonymous coward, wants to get all uppity and "protect america's rights"... by starting a trade war?? i mean wtf?? are you high? are you smoking crack?? you have *no idea* of how dangerous it is to piss china off these days.

      the only hope that we have is that the people making decisions in China are smarter than the extremely dumb "reactive" mentally-retarded ones in the USA. i *believe* that they will have people doing strategic scenario analysis that minimises the chances of china ending up rioting and consequenly having to start a war. such as working out where and how to influence people in the USA by hitting imports with agricultural trade tariffs of over 20%, and starting patent lawsuits that hit the largest US semiconductor companies.

      China is acting EXTREMELY smart, here, basically, by putting warning shots across the US economic bow. but for god's sake Anonymous Coward you *have* to understand and take seriously that the consequences of China going down the shitter is basically that the USA's stupid, stupid reactionary politics will indirectly start World War 3, alright?

      so if you don't want that to happen, get off your high horse, call your Congressman, call your Senator, and tell them to pressurise Trump to back the fuck off, ok? give them that crnhq.org website link and tell them to damn well read it, ok?

    7. Re:And this... by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 2

      ... and the notion that we have to put up with it without sanctions is YOUR fantasy.

    8. Re:And this... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

      and we have some fucking idiot president in the USA who, just like you, anonymous coward, wants to get all uppity and "protect america's rights"... by starting a trade war?? i mean wtf?? are you high? are you smoking crack??

      The problem of course, is that the time to retaliate against China was a long long time ago. Maybe the latest possible window was early in Bush # 1's presidency.

      Trying to reset the clock to the 1950's simply will not work almost 70 years later

      Somewhere, some how, some people in the US seem to think that the USA can force the rest of the world to kowtow to our economic might, that we can to put up tarriffs, which were once considered economic suicide, but have somehow magically transformed into Republican dogma, and a true lynchpin of the free market.

      Who knew that other countries could put up tarrifs on US goods in retaliation for US tarriffs? This reaction is truly the telltale sign that Republican rule has taken America to a place where any respect is gone.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    9. Re:And this... by sd4f · · Score: 1
      The threat of war is never to be taken lightly, but currently, China isn't capable of fighting a war for very long. They have people, but that's about it. They don't have any substantive navy, air force or ability to force project. Considering the capability of modern armaments, analysts suggest that, unlike WW2, what you start the war with, will have to last the duration of that war. WW2 was different, because factories could be hidden, and winning the war basically came down to ability to produce meteriel to fight the war. Today, try to produce modern materiel with your power stations destroyed, or your explosives production destroyed, or your semi-conductor fabs destroyed. It's pretty much a given that if declarations of war were to be issued, those things would get targeted and probably destroyed immediately.

      However, China's diminutive military will not be inadequate forever.

    10. Re: And this... by djinn6 · · Score: 1

      When 2 people in a room throw grenades at each other, does the one with a bigger grenade win?

    11. Re:And this... by lkcl · · Score: 1

      this is *very* interesting. i was aware that the cost of living in china has been rising for some time, but this makes it plain that with the increase in cost of living has also come an increase in income. consequently ordinary chinese citizens are BUYING from ABROAD, ONLINE: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/sta...

      if the USA starts screwing around with a trade war, they're going to lose out basically.

    12. Re:And this... by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      Nice, a string of Chinese AC trolls.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    13. Re:And this... by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      Same here. Crucial's been great.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    14. Re:And this... by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      A Chinese General stated once that, in case of an US attack on China, they would retaliate by hitting the major US population centers with their nukes (unlike the Nork target map which basically showed naval and military targets). They have enough nukes to do that if they wanted to. Also, since they never did sign agreements with the US for bilateral inspections, like Russia does, the fact is no one knows the actual number of warheads or missiles the Chinese have. My estimation is by their number of regiments, units per regiment, warheads per missile, etc. By these estimates they have actually been substantially growing their nuclear arsenal while the US and Russia reduced theirs in the past after the Cold War. Russia has also been rebuilding theirs of late. It is know that the Chinese got gas centrifuge technology for decades now so they should have had plenty of time to stockpile U-235 over decades to make a lot of bombs economically. Supposedly they have hundreds of ICBMs which can target the US and recently they have been adapting MIRV technology to those (e.g. DF-31AG, DF-41). The Chinese likely have thousands of MRBMs (e.g. DF-21) which can hit all the major US allies in their neighborhood in Asia.

      Their immediate objective is to invade Taiwan and for that they already have plenty of resources as it is. They have anti-ship ballistic missiles, an air force with hundreds of 4th generation aircraft (>400 Su-27 derivatives like the Su-30MKK, J-11, J-16, J-15, >300 J-10), at least two squadrons of 5th generation aircraft (J-20), supersonic anti-ship missiles, ballistic (hypersonic) anti-ship missiles, 4x Type 071 LPDs, with LCACs and amphibious IFVs/tanks comparable with the US San Antonio class in displacement, with more in construction. They also have over-the-horizon radar and an anti-air missile umbrella that can cover the entire island of Taiwan from the Chinese coast if need be. Then there is their continuously growing fleet of destroyers (like the Type 052C/D) : x15, and frigates (Type 054A) : 27x. In fact they even launched two 13kt cruisers to the water just two days ago (Type 055).

    15. Re:And this... by CaffeinatedBacon · · Score: 1

      You mean when the artificial reef shows up offshore?

    16. Re:And this... by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      PS: If China did invade Taiwan, do you really think the US would go to war with China? At worst it would be a repeat of the Phoney War again. Both sides still would have a couple of years left to continue to rearm until the war escalated further. Now if China invaded Indochina, or the Philippines, or Korea, that might be a different question. Still the US might not bother themselves to respond militarily at least in the start. The question is does China need to do that? As it is they can trade for the resources they need right now and their military is still now fully upgraded. Only half their airplanes have been upgraded to 4th generation for example.

  2. You are surprised? by thesupraman · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You mean their reaction to the US banning chip supplies to ZTE by banning chip imports from Micron is... what... surprising? unexpected?

    If you want to be the playground bully, it pays to make sure you can hold that position...

    1. Re:You are surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Trump wants to be the bully but has no idea what it means, can't hold the position, and is picking the fights with our ALLIES first...

    2. Re:You are surprised? by sit1963nz · · Score: 1

      The USA has always treated its allies with contempt.

    3. Re:You are surprised? by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 3, Insightful

      China is not an ally.

      And ZTE was caught spying on both government and private owners of their products.

    4. Re:You are surprised? by sit1963nz · · Score: 1

      The UK is, Australia is, New Zealand is, the EU is Watch this https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    5. Re:You are surprised? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      China is not an ally. And ZTE was caught spying on both government and private owners of their products.

      Wow - where you been keeping yourself, Jane?. I havent seen a post from you in a long time.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    6. Re:You are surprised? by sd4f · · Score: 4, Informative

      I think this is something that will only get worse as time goes on, in that, if the USA (I've never been in the states btw, I'm Australian) wants to maintain it's global economic position (in your terms, the playground bully, and more formally speaking [and probably ironically too], maintain the pax americana), it needs to start acting against China strategically. The problem with acting now is, the USA might not be in its ideal position to do so, but I think it will only get worse for the USA as time goes on, as China isn't sitting idly; it's growing and establishing its foothold.

      Now, while I'm not infatuated with the USA, I'm concerned far more by China's political interference in oceania, and their general subversive nature of establishing their own hegemony. I'm inclined to side on the countries which, at least nominally, share our values of personal liberty, democracy, and a rule of law, which arguably places most above that of China. Despite our flaws, we're still much better than a regime which denies those freedoms, and champions the idea that people are too stupid to rule them selves, therefore they must be lorded over by the select few.

      Another point to consider is that the Chinese have a chip on their shoulder that westerners have been exploiting them, and that has been stymieing their development. Their concept of face means that they're proud and arrogant, to their own detriment, to the degree that they'd rather go down with the ship than change course if it means admitting they were/are wrong, or that systems of governance that encourage skulduggery, corruption, and self interest, over talent and merit, has been holding them back.

      From a trade perspective, I've noticed a growing sentiment amongst Chinese that they're starting to feel superior. They feel that where once their stuff wasn't taken all that seriously, it is significantly not the case now, and relating to their concept of sociological face, while they grow with the idea that they are superior, it is us who should be grateful that they trade with us, and we need them, and not they need us. This is definitely becoming the case in Australia, where we're so exposed to China, that if they stop buying our resources, we have problems, if we stop selling residential property to them, we have problems, if we try to stop them donating money/buying our politicians, we have problems! They have us where they want us; we're reliant on their money, they're not reliant on our resources.

    7. Re:You are surprised? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      None of that changes the fact that tariffs are hurting the US, particularly smaller companies that actually try to make stuff there instead of outsourcing to China. It's ironic that the ones now suffering from component shortages and higher material costs are the ones providing jobs to Americans, while the people who already moved manufacturing to China are much less affected.

      These are the US tariffs on electronic components, by the way, not the retaliatory ones from China. The pain from the Chinese ones will come on top, along with the EU ones.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    8. Re:You are surprised? by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      None of that changes the fact that tariffs are hurting the US, particularly smaller companies that actually try to make stuff there instead of outsourcing to China. It's ironic that the ones now suffering from component shortages and higher material costs are the ones providing jobs to Americans, while the people who already moved manufacturing to China are much less affected.

      These are the US tariffs on electronic components, by the way, not the retaliatory ones from China. The pain from the Chinese ones will come on top, along with the EU ones.

      Trade is not a zero sum game that Trump thinks it is. That's the problem. Buying something from overseas does not mean that money is gone from the country - trade is bilateral. We outsource manufacturing of electronics to China, and the Chinese then buy luxury vehicles from the US. Or did, until the conglomerates spun out all the luxury vehicle sales.

      The other problem is the "losing out" problem - trade surpluses and deficits will always happen. But the goal is to have them be relatively small with respect to total trade - $20M is tiny if total trade is $1B.

      And that's why Trump's tariffs hurt - Trump looks at the small number - "oh no, we have a deficit" and ignores that it's tiny compared to the trillion dollars or more economic activity it generates on both sides. You put in tariffs to equalize that small amount, and no big surprise, but it ripples into the bigger picture. It's like the old saying "penny wise, pound foolish" where you are so happy you saved a few pennies on something, even though in doing so it actually costs you a few dollars. Like the guy who drives across town in traffic to save 5 cents a liter (roughly 20 cents a gallon).

      It also will hurt a ton because the US economy is so big and has benefited so much from trade.

      If trade was so terrible, third world countries would not be clamoring for it.

  3. Theme? by dohzer · · Score: 1

    Taiwan should do what China did. Just make a massive donation to a planned Indonesian theme park, golf course, whatever.... just make sure the project has financial links to Trump and he'll sort out export/import bans like he did with ZTE.

  4. Five by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Five, count 'em, five â(TM)s in the summery. I wonder what the record is?

  5. No, troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    No, this is a standard protectionist MO from China. They have done this at least 4 times to micron in the last decade. I know you hate trump, but get your head putt off your ass.

  6. China has a history of stealing Semiconductor IP by Nova+Express · · Score: 5, Informative

    That's pretty much what they do. They're retaliating against Micron because they got caught red-handed stealing their designs from UMC in Taiwan.

    The irony is that China has no domestic semiconductor equipment manufacturers worth speaking of, so they'll still need to buy the equipment from American and Japanese firms like Applied Materials, LAM Research, and Tokyo Electron. Plus they're having extreme difficulty finding qualified semiconductor process engineers willing to move to China.

    Plus they stole it for a fab that's still under production, so by the time they are producing chips using the stolen designs, Micron will probably already be fabbing their next design turn/feature shrink...

    --
    Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)

    http://www.lawrenceperson.com/

  7. Re:The People by sit1963nz · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The USA is not any better, by "the people" they mean "The corporations"

  8. Re: No, moron by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 2

    Harley is moving some production out of the US because non-US customers are a growth area for them. US H-D customers are in decline, while in the EU there is growth. American millineals are not motorcycle buyers. They buy shitty scooters with two cycle engines.

  9. A super easy solution to stop China in the cold .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    China has no domestic semiconductor equipment manufacturers worth speaking of, so they'll still need to buy the equipment from American and Japanese firms like Applied Materials, LAM Research, and Tokyo Electron

    Stop selling China equipment that enable them to produce chips.

    China *does have* domestic equipment makers, but the machines they produce is so lousy, even the Chinese semiconductor process engineers are avoiding those machines like a plaque .

    If we stop selling the equipment to them, the Chinese have to rely on the 2nd hand market --- which means, they will be getting really antiquated technologies, at least 5 years old, (40nm node and up) which isn't going to help them.