
US company sues China for Green Dam 'code theft' - jacquesm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8442771.stm
======
awa
It will be interesting to see what will come put of the lawsuit, however, I
don't know whether its a smart move by the company to claim that the code
behind the software is theirs since the software doesn't work well. (I don't
see a chance of them getting any money from the lawsuit)

------
blintson
This company apparently _wants_ to be associated with an oppressive
government.

It's like if Apple ran the 1984 ad, and Apple was the dictator on the giant
screen, instead of the young woman smashing it.

~~~
grellas
Not sure this is a fair reading of the suit.

The company filing the suit (Cybersitter) promotes its software as a "family
friendly parental controls" product that keeps kids "safe on the Internet."
The company tagline is "Protecting Kids and Families for 14
Years."(<http://www.cybersitter.com/>)

Now, I am not saying that this is not an opportunistic suit and I don't
pretend to know the technology. The way I read the facts, however, is that
Chinese software developers are alleged to have stolen some of the code from
Cybersitter's product and incorporated it into _their_ software product which
is in turn used by various computer manufacturers to comply with the Chinese
government's dictate that all sorts of web information be blocked from the
view of Chinese citizens.

If I understand this correctly, the U.S. company has no connection with the
Green Dam product (i.e., the offending product containing the allegedly stolen
code) other than claiming that a key portion of its code was ripped off in
order to develop it illegally. This would not make them culpable in the
censorship or the oppression. It is as if someone broke into my home, stole my
knife, and (using my property) killed someone with it.

Of course, the chances of recovering anything from the Chinese government or
from the Chinese developers are nil.

The key to the lawsuit, and the obviously opportunistic part of it, comes in
trying to get money from hardware vendors as alleged conspirators in the
infringement alleged to have occurred. This is pretty aggressive and may even
be sleazy, but it does appear to be the strategy.

