Slashdot Mirror


Samsung's Foldable Screen Tech Has Been Stolen, Sold To China (cnn.com)

Prosecutors in South Korea say that Samsung's latest bendable screen technology has been stolen and sold to two Chinese companies. "The prosecutors allege that a Samsung supplier leaked blueprints of Samsung's 'flexible OLED edge panel 3D lamination' to a company that it had set up," reports CNN. "That company then sold the tech secrets to the Chinese firms for nearly $14 million, according to the prosecutors." CNN reports: The Suwon District Prosecutor's Office charged 11 people on Thursday with stealing tech secrets from Samsung, the office said in a statement. They did not name the people or companies involved in the theft. Samsung Display, a subsidiary of the South Korean conglomerate, said in a statement Friday that it was "surprised and appalled at the results of the investigation by prosecutors."

Prosecutors said Samsung invested six years and some 150 billion won ($130 million) to develop the bendable screen. Investigators have not been able to track down and question two Chinese individuals believed to be involved in the case, and have asked Interpol to help find and detain them. Of the 11 people indicted, three have been detained.

33 of 75 comments (clear)

  1. Yeah, well by Presence+Eternal · · Score: 1

    I guess that's bad in principle, but their never ending quest to make phones that cannot fit into protective cases doesn't leave me with any sympathy for them.

  2. Enough with the derping about US history by MikeRT · · Score: 2

    China is not a "developing country" anymore. It hasn't been for about 15-20 years, if not longer. It is to us what the US was to Europe in the 1930s, and by then the federal government would have prosecuted the shit out of such an act, but not a damn thing will be done to any Chinese that escaped the South Korean government unless one of the parties brings a big hammer out against China.

    1. Re:Enough with the derping about US history by mykepredko · · Score: 2

      While I agree that China does not fit the model/ideation of a "developing country" it is not a "developed country".

      While there are many high tech cities and regions, there are huge areas (with large populations) of the country that are still quite primitive in need of infrastructure, education and industry. Along with that, the regions that have become modernized still have some very simplistic ideas towards intellectual property rights as well as what we would consider moral (or at least, contract abiding) behaviour. This is exemplified in this situation where the perpetrators of this crime not only found customers for what they've stolen but they've also able to escape custody (at least so far).

      I think it will be another generation (25 years) before China and her companies can be considered to be fully reliable partners.

    2. Re:Enough with the derping about US history by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      "While there are many high tech cities and regions, there are huge areas (with large populations) of the country that are still quite primitive in need of infrastructure, education and industry. "

      But enough about the USA...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  3. None of this happened. by theCat · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The thieves did not sell the stolen tech to a Chinese company, they gave it to the Chinese government. This is a good way to advance yourself in China. As such, there is zero possibility of getting the Chi-Comms to cooperate in an investigation. Samsung can write the entire thing off along with 1,000 other inventions the Chi-Comms lifted over the last few years.

    --
    =^..^= all your rodent are belong to us
    1. Re:None of this happened. by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      The thieves did not sell the stolen tech to a Chinese company, they gave it to the Chinese government.

      Most likely they did both. It is highly probably that whatever Chinese company bought the tech is associated with someone high up in either a major city government, the central government, Communist party, or PLA leadership.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  4. I'm torn by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

    On the one hand, we need to protect IP so that people keep producing it. On the other, I really, really want affordable rollable/foldable screens.

    --
    Your ad here. Ask me how!
    1. Re:I'm torn by MobyDisk · · Score: 4, Informative

      none of which bears any similarity to property.

      There's plenty of similarity. Just like physical property, patents, trademarks, and copyrights can be bought and sold. Each grants the owner with unique rights. Sounds a lot like property to me. In the United States, property-like rights for patents and copyrights originate in the US constitution, which says "[The Congress shall have power] to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.” The courts have consistently ruled for over 100 years that this includes the ability to buy and sell them.

    2. Re:I'm torn by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      There's patents, trademarks, and copyright - three completely unrelated classes of artificially protected work

      You left out trade secrets. They are all related in that they vest certain limitations on what other people can do, and are producible solely as the product of the mind (until you get to registration/enforcement, which can be expensive.).

      none of which bears any similarity to property.

      I dunno. It seems as real as a share of stock or a bank account. They can be bought, sold, rented. They have no physical manifestation. They're assets confiscatable under bankruptcy and usable as collateral.

      Heck, I'd like to hear how it's any different from owning a vacant building in a city you never visit. I mean, seriously, please try to explain the difference.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    3. Re:I'm torn by nospam007 · · Score: 1

      "On the one hand, we need to protect IP so that people keep producing it. On the other, I really, really want affordable rollable/foldable screens."

      Sure, but not this one, I don't know why nobody ever mentions it:
      It folds the wrong way!

    4. Re:I'm torn by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      everyone steals tech, they have done this since the dawn of their 'industrial revolution'.

      FTFY. Every country tries to steal tech, both commercial and military.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    5. Re:I'm torn by Immerman · · Score: 2

      Property is singular - what you have, I do not. If I take a piece of property from you, you no longer have it. That is the single defining quality of ownership rights over property.

      Intellectual assets do not share that quality. They can be duplicated infinitely at negligible cost, and the original owner loses nothing. The actual legal ownership of a grant of patent or copyright may behave in a similar manner - but that's just a document. The actual copyright itself is an artificial legal restriction imposed on everyone else.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  5. And the "Tech" is so bad that there is no product? by ffkom · · Score: 1

    So given that no product using that technology has hit the market, it will be difficult to argue that damage has been done.

  6. Chinese copy machine by Chewbacon · · Score: 1

    You put a device in one end and out pops a cheaper copy on the other side! No espionage involved.

    --
    Chewbacon
    The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
  7. Re:And the "Tech" is so bad that there is no produ by ffkom · · Score: 1

    Oh, only now I get it: By "foldable", the article does not mean really foldable displays, but "some display that is slightly rounded at two of its outer edges.

  8. trump needs up the tariffs on this tech from china by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    trump needs up the tariffs on this tech from china

  9. Blueprints? ( by Snotnose · · Score: 1

    I think not. As a thought experiment, I'll design a 3D display that takes 2 old school CRT displays, 30" each, at if memory serves 5 lb per inch for that tech. I'll mount them each to a sheet of plywood, and join the plywood with hinges.

    I can easily make a blueprint of that.

    Will it work? Yeah, pretty sure I can make that work.

    Will it scale to a 2 lb set of glasses that sit on your nose? Ummm

  10. Re:And the "Tech" is so bad that there is no produ by shaksys · · Score: 1

    Samsung spend billions developing it and not some china firm gets it for 14 million and gets to compete with Samsung. If this is allowed to happen, companies will no longer want to spend on R and D

  11. Re:"IP" & "stolen" VS hard physical reality. by shaksys · · Score: 1

    how dare Samsung spend billions to develop the tech and now will be at a substantial loss because the Chinese firms can use it without spending a dime on R&D. Samsung will know better than to develop new technology in the future.

  12. Lesson: Invest in keeping trade secrets secret by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Growing pain for Samsung. China is doing exactly what every other developing nation did prior to gaining supremecy.

  13. Re:"IP" & "stolen" VS hard physical reality. by MikeMo · · Score: 1

    You’re being sarcastic, but his is how Apple felt when Samsung produced an iPhone clone.

  14. yeah by Ryanrule · · Score: 1

    so kill them. any anyone who tries to export. across the org. problem solved.

  15. Re:"IP" & "stolen" VS hard physical reality. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Rounded corners requires far less intellectual insight than the technology required to make foldable/rollable displays.

  16. Don't Need Folding Screens by BrendaEM · · Score: 1

    Marketing people need folding screens to sell cellphones, apparently. I am a "power user" who just want's a good flat screen--without rounding corners that have a blue line, and that sticks up, so we cannot put a proper screen protector on them.

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
  17. Where are the patents?? by AC-x · · Score: 1

    Um, shouldn't Samsung have patented this? Which would make all the plans public by default?

    1. Re:Where are the patents?? by Shazatoga · · Score: 1

      A patent give the minimal information needed to describe the design. Real world implementation and manufacturing involve much more than is in the patent.

    2. Re: Where are the patents?? by AC-x · · Score: 1

      A patent is supposed to be detailed enough that someone else can reproduce the invention based on the patent. That implementation is then legally protected so no one else can sell a device using that implementation.

  18. Re: iphone 11 by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

    Yeah.. I don't think you know what silicone is... Think fake titties, not computers

  19. Not Stolen, But Given Away by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

    The technology wasn't stolen. The supplier leaked the blueprints. It's not as if someone hacked into their systems and took it or it was a phishing scheme. No, Samsung set up a company and a bunch of people from there sold it to some Chinese companies. Maybe Samsung should implement better hiring practices or pay better.

  20. Re:And the "Tech" is so bad that there is no produ by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

    The R&D costs were $130M and not in the billions (that was billions of won).

  21. Re:And the "Tech" is so bad that there is no produ by geek · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Or they will, but instead of offloading the cost of keeping their secrets safe on governments, they’ll learn proper security. This would have the added benefit of protecting end uses of their products.

    There is no proper security here. China is offering people at one company 7 times their current salary guaranteed for 3 years if they leave and come work for them with just the IP they have in their heads. You literally can not defend against that as a private company. China has promised to spend hundreds of billions before 2025 to steal the IP of western nations and stand up fabs in country to produce and sell them without the RnD costs.

    The only way to deal with this is massive tariffs and trade embargoes. China is the worlds largest copying machine and deserves no respect economically on the world stage.

  22. Bad for business. good for Humanity by edris90 · · Score: 1

    This is a good thing. Companies keep things secret then overtime the secrets are lost to history. It's nice when intellectual property gets stolen and copied so it's our might actually be around later when the original company no longer exists. I mean unless we're planning on the human race not existing in 50 Generations

  23. China are fairly relaxed about IP by TJHook3r · · Score: 1

    Western companies particularly cannot compete once their IP is being produced in sweatshop conditions - which is ironic because a lot of them set up different sweatshops in the same country in the first place.