
The Plot to Steal the Color White - nickles
http://www.bloomberg.com/features/2016-stealing-dupont-white/
======
simplexion
_" It’s about stealing something you can make a buck off of. It’s part of a
strategy to profit off what American ingenuity creates."_

This may be a quote of the assistant attorney general of the U.S. Department
of Justice’s national security division which can be easily ignored but the
next paragraph just makes it seem like the author wants you to accept the
quote as fact.

 _" A 2013 study estimated that China accounted for as much as 80 percent of
the $300 billion in losses sustained by U.S. companies from the theft of
intellectual property."_

What absolute nonsense. It truly makes this article come across as American
propaganda.

~~~
troisx
Do you have facts that counter that 80 percent number? I'm curious why you
think the Chinese aren't stealing American intellectual property. It's not
propaganda if it's true, and everything I've seen indicates that the Chinese
are trying to steal American IP on a regular basis, so please state anything
you know that counters this article.

~~~
PakG1
The claim is about as hollow as the claim that software and media companies
lose exorbitant amounts of money due to piracy. No, a large portion of that
revenue would have been non-existent anyway for a number of reasons.

It reminds me of the time I attended the annual American Chamber of Commerce
Asia conference in 2010, that year in Beijing. One of the keynote speakers was
the Asia CEO for Honeywell. They went into China, tried to localize their
products, and were slaughtered by copycats. He said a common saying among
those copycats was that Honeywell created the market demand for industrial
products that previously didn't actually exist in China before, but it took
Chinese companies to supply products that actually met market needs at prices
customers were willing to pay. Honeywell didn't cry foul and pout. They
revised their R&D strategy to be able to make good local products from the
ground up and fought back the way market competition should happen. He said
the lessons they learned now form the base of their strategy for entering any
new foreign markets.

Yeah, there are all sorts of shenanigans that can happen everywhere. The
question should always be how do you fight back and win with something
superior, not how do you cry foul.

~~~
troisx
So you're claiming that having people prosecuted for theft of IP is "pouting"
and that companies should just accept it and not complain? So if I came to
your company and stole all of your trade secrets you'd just say "Well played,
I guess I'll just have to compete better!" Interesting.

~~~
madaxe_again
Do bear in mind that DuPont got started with TiO2 by taking a patented process
and just using it, screwing the Australian license holders.

Funny how they cry foul when the shoe is on the other foot.

------
aravindet
What a terrible article. Lots of unprovable allegations and over-the-top
adjectives, very light on actual facts. Looks like it was written by
representatives for the prosecution or DuPont.

The author throws "America" and "China" in there, and seems to assume that
that’s enough to prove guilt.

~~~
mc32
It's a story about industrial espionage, it includes allegations and claims
from both sides; what did you expect, Xinhua news?

~~~
bostik
I find it fascinating that the article never uses that term. It comes close to
it, using "economic espionage" twice, but otherwise refers to the activity as
trade-secret theft, or just "plain" theft.

Which it is, of course. But I couldn't shake the feeling that the author, and
likely the editor too, have both made sure to avoid calling it industrial
espionage. To me that term would have a very loaded connotation: "Company X is
competing in an industry, and have inferior technology to someone else. Of
course they will resort to espionage. They would be stupid and financially
irresponsible not to."

Or maybe I'm just too cynical and jaded.

~~~
becauseICan
Or Liew was charge for violations of the "Economic Espionage Act". And theft
is more common as a charge since one doesn't need to prove as many extenuating
facts i.e. only that it was stolen, not why it was stolen. I suspect the
author was being careful to be factual.

[https://www.fbi.gov/sanfrancisco/press-
releases/2014/walter-...](https://www.fbi.gov/sanfrancisco/press-
releases/2014/walter-liew-sentenced-to-15-years-in-prison-for-economic-
espionage)

------
Saad_M
I'm surprised that a lot of the leaked information about DuPont's process came
from disgruntled ex-employees. Surely DuPont's problem is with those ex-
employees leaking sensitive information than anything else.

~~~
ktRolster
Expect a lot more disgruntled employees now that DuPont is merging with Dow.

------
linuxkerneldev
The article liberally drops anti-Chinese sentiment at every paragraph. Things
like:

"Of Chinese heritage, Liew was born in Malaysia in August 1957."

That would be the equivalent of writing:

"Of Kenyan heritage, Obama was born in the USA".

~~~
chaostheory
I don't disagree with you. However the article does bring up a topic that
isn't discussed that often yet.

Where do the loyalties of naturalized US (and Canadian) citizens truely lie? I
feel that this was less of an issue until the US began allowing dual
citizenships i.e. you no longer have to renounce citizenship from your country
of origin in order to become a US citizen / you can become a citizen of
another country and still be a US citizen. On the surface, you'd expect this
to be simple; these individuals would be most loyal to the US... As a
naturalized US citizen of Chinese descent, I've had some interesting
conversations with other naturalized US citizens of Chinese descent that would
show that it's more complicated than that.

I'm not sure how, but the topic of "what would happen if China and the US ever
declared war on each other?" came up. To my surprise, the other naturalized
Chinese Americans told me that they would be conflicted as to who they would
support. For context, these are educated people with post-grad degrees from
places like Berkeley with occupations to match. They also seem completely
naturalized with accents that would fool people into thinking they were born
and raised here. The kicker is that neither person was born or raised in China
but each grew up in some Southeast Asian country, yet they're essentially
comtemplating treason solely due to their race. I found it strange. Since what
I have is just anecdotal, I'm guessing (and hoping) that most naturalized US
citizens are way more loyal than that and I feel that Chinese Americans born
and raised in the US don't have this issue at all. Still I have a feeling that
this is probably only going to get worse when you have stuff like birth
tourism happening i.e. You get US citizens who spend most of their lives in a
foreign country resulting in loyalties to that foreign country

[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/01/china-us-birth-
tour...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/01/china-us-birth-
tourism_n_7187180.html)

To be fair, China isn't the only country related to this issue. I could be
wrong but the US probably has the same problem with dual citizenships
involving Russia, Israel, Turkey, or any other country that isn't 100% aligned
with US interests

Of course, this has a fix. Just don't allow dual citizenships in the US. Force
people to choose.

~~~
DanBC
> Where do the loyalties of naturalized US (and Canadian) citizens truely lie?

See, for example, the Cricket Test.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cricket_test](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cricket_test)

> The cricket test, also known as the Tebbit test, was a controversial phrase
> coined in April 1990 by the British Conservative politician Norman Tebbit in
> reference to the perceived lack of loyalty to the England cricket team among
> South Asian and Caribbean immigrants and their children. Tebbit suggested
> that those immigrants who support their native countries rather than England
> at the sport of cricket are not significantly integrated into the United
> Kingdom.[1]

I think it's dumb, but a bunch of English people at the time seemed to think
it was useful and relevant.

~~~
chaostheory
Supporting a country in cricket and supporting a country in a war are two very
different things. To be very clear, we weren't talking about cricket, soccer,
or the Olympics; so bringing it up is useless.

That's the thing about dual citizenship. It's not irrational to support your
country of origin, unless you're part of a class of persecuted people. That is
the place where you were born and raised, and where you derive your (initial)
cultural values which you may or may not keep.

[http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-dual-
citizen...](http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-dual-
citizenship-20141228-story.html)

"But the concept of dual citizenship is problematic both symbolically and
practically, and could become divisive if more immigrants decide to avail
themselves of the privileges of U.S. citizens — as we believe they ought to
do. U.S citizens with strong ties to their ancestral countries have been
accused of divided loyalties in the past even when they didn't possess
citizenship in those countries — witness the internment of 110,000 Japanese
and Japanese Americans during World War II. But when a U.S. citizen is also a
citizen of another country, the accusation is even easier to make."

Ending dual citizenship would help prevent a future version of Japanese
internment in the US.

~~~
jacquesm
The better solution would be to not have people be 'loyal' to any country at
all. The whole thing is just a way to be able to demand all kinds of services
where no obligation to provide should exist in the first place and where -
usually - there is no loyalty in the reverse direction.

Any country that wants my loyalty to a flag or some abstract concept has lost
my vote of confidence right at the gate. Countries - just like people - should
be judged by their actions and loyalty should be earned rather than demanded.

~~~
chaostheory
Like completely ending corruption or racism, it would be a better solution,
but is it a realistic one that you can achieve within a decade?

> countries - just like people - should be judged by their actions and loyalty
> should be earned rather than demanded.

I agree. On that note, maintaining a dual citizenship is an action that will
be judged. Even with the constant influx of immigrants, it's rare to see. Less
than half of 1% of a population of about 300 million people maintain dual
citizenships. Most immigrants that attain US citizenship do not maintain a
dual one.

------
jackgavigan
This brings the movie _The Spanish Prisoner_ to mind.

------
vacri
I like how the DoJ makes it sound like _spying_ is fine and dandy, but
_theft_? Well, we can't have that...

------
throwaway2048
The Jingoistic tone of this article is pretty distasteful

