Cisco Sued For Helping China Repress Falun Gong
from the under-what-basis? dept
News.com has a report of a class action lawsuit, filed by 11 plaintiffs who claimed they were tortured by the Chinese government, against Cisco for apparently supplying the government with the tools to track and (in some cases, falsely) arrest supposed members of Falun Gong:The lawsuit, which seeks class-action status, alleges that Golden Shield--described in Cisco marketing materials as Policenet--resulted in the arrest of as many as 5,000 Falun Gong members. Cisco "competed aggressively" for the contracts to design the Golden Shield system "with full knowledge that it was to be used for the suppression of the Falun Gong religion," according to the lawsuit.While I find the Chinese government's actions in suppressing dissident reprehensible, I'm not at all sure how there's a legitimate case against Cisco here. It may have made a bad decision to do business with the Chinese government, but is that illegal? While News.com doesn't supply a copy of the lawsuit (and why not?), I can't see what legitimate charges there can be here. This seems like yet another case of misapplied liability. Obviously, these people feel they can't go after the Chinese government, but using Cisco as a legal proxy doesn't make much sense. I could see protesting Cisco's actions, but suing the company seems like a stretch.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: censorship, china, class action, falun gong, lawsuit, repression
Companies: cisco
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Cisco lawsuit
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Cisco lawsuit
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Cisco lawsuit
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Cisco lawsuit
I hold your hand when you shoot the politician in a jurisdiction (sovereign country) where it is legal to actually shoot politicians? [Note: Sadly there is no such jurisdiction.. otherwise... ;)]
The problem here is that if Cisco did anything, though morally repugnant and maybe unethical, it was legal within China at that time (and probably still is).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Cisco lawsuit
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Cisco lawsuit
15 years ago or so when I was interning at *harumphharumph* I remember working on an internationalized version of Unix that was being prepared in part as a result of contracts with the Chinese government. That was back when most people in the US thought the Dalai Lama was the kid from The Golden Child, and it still gave me a queasy feeling. Nowadays every IT company playing on the global stage should be sweating every email and phone conversation with the Chinese government... not simply because of the moral dilemma, but because any technological development you attempt to rent out will likely end up duplicated and home-grown for 1/50th the price.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Maybe if it's illegal to usurp the authority of the State Department?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
So there's already a precedent of out of jurisdiction prosecution. Might be interesting to see how this plays out.
- Dan.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Civil matters are very very different.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
If though you were still in the country where the drug was legal, and the company was foreign though based there, it would be a matter for contract law on whether the company could terminate employment. Even then the company could run foul of unfair dismissal laws relevant to that jurisdiction.
Welcome to the wonderful world of International Employment laws. *eeek*
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
where the commentors are quite sane... and no one ever tells an untruth ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
If I have a (legal) joint in Amsterdam then fly home to a less permissive country 5 days later then
- I haven't possessed the drug at home
- I haven't bought the drug at home
- I haven't taken the drug at home
- I have not been "intoxicated" with the drug at home
But if a very sensitive test can show it still in some qty in my bloodstream are you saying that
a) there is is an offence under which I could be prosecuted in any country you know of ?
b) that you'd be OK with that morally ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
WTF
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Misapplied Liability
It's about as stupid as suing a bar that sells people alcohol knowing that they are already drunk and are going to be driving home. It's not the bar's fault, is it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Misapplied Liability
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Alien Tort Statute
It seems the Statute they most commonly use for jurisdiction purposes is the Alien Tort Statute 28 U.S.C. § 1350 [aka Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA)]
Seems there has been of late a fair few uses of this statute, mostly involving Falun Gong, and other victims of torture around the globe. Though only a few involving corporations with (as far as I can tell based on limited research) all of them being either dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, found not liable by a jury, or settled as in the case of Wang Xiaoning v Yahoo
So until the actual lawsuit is made available, not sure if their is merit or not in the case, though ATCA sounds interesting.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Alien Tort Statute
http://www.scribd.com/doc/55996428/Doe-v-Cisco-Complaint-5-11
FYI - Not sure if you are American, but court docs are generally public information. Most federal paper is submitted electronically, so you can usually get it online with a little wheedling.
Only skimmed it, but it seems like the causes of action are for assisting China in a course of action that included, among other violations of international law, torture and extrajudicial killing. So it seems pretty squarely in what the ATCA is for. (though I am no expert, just a general practitioner, so grain of salt etc.).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Secondary or Accessory?
Harbouring a fugitive is an approximate parallel. By giving them a place to rest, you're not exactly directly involved in the crime, but you are indirectly helping them in their criminal activities. And yet it's a crime.
There is a line somewhere here, it's just a matter if where it lies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
for those calling for laws/judgements, i ask, do you really want the government involved? the answer to that depends, i suspect, on if you believe the government is capable anymore of actually making laws that benefit the people instead of the lobbyists. i am dubious on this proposition myself.
the internet, however, has forever changed the way we communicate with people. public exposure and condemnation is, imho, the most effective deterrent to shady dealings.
if cisco becomes publicly reviled for their actions and large groups of people equate their brand with greed and a willingness to make a buck before ethical considerations, how hard do you think microsoft and ibm, and sun microsystems will think before accepting similar contracts?
i guess i have more faith in corporations (even ones such as those named) to recognize their own self interest than i do in government to...well, do anything really. it's not a perfect solution. for instance it leaves the folks from falun gong, in this case, sol, but we as a people need to stop looking for the government to jump in and solve every issue.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Communication technologies are awesome.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Legal?
Helping the Chinese torture people OUGHT to be illegal, but that's a different subject.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]