China Files Case Against Intel's Wireless Network

China Files Case Against Intel's Wireless Network

http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/05/29/1533242&from=rss

Posted by Hemos on Monday May 29, @01:14PM
from the [b]going-thru-the-money dept.[/b]

Krishna Dagli writes "China has launched a case against American chipmaker Intel's near-monopoly on encryption standards for wireless local area network (WLAN) equipment, state press reported Monday."

China Files Case Against Intel's Wireless Network | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 181 comments | Search Discussion

Display Options Threshold:
-1: 181 comments
0: 170 comments
1: 121 comments
2: 89 comments
3: 25 comments
4: 10 comments
5: 6 comments

Flat
Nested
No Comments
Threaded

Oldest First
Newest First
Highest Scores First
Oldest First (Ignore Threads)
Newest First (Ignore Threads)


The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Can we?

(Score:4, Interesting)
by Whiney Mac Fanboy (963289) * <whineymacfanboy@gmail.com> on Monday May 29, @01:18PM (#15425087)
(http://whineymacfanboy.googlepages.com/ | Last Journal: Wednesday April 26, @06:11AM)


Can we all just ignore this story until xinhua / china decide to release some information on what (specifically), the IEEE is supposed to have done?

-1 Lack of detail.

[ Reply to This ]

Re:Can we?

(Score:4, Insightful)
by PRC Banker (970188) on Monday May 29, @01:27PM (#15425125)


FTFA: It is about abuse of a monopoly. Could have a lot of beef, or could not, but to answer your question:

China has accused the makers of the technology developed by the chipmaking giant Intel of unethical behaviour and has asked the International Standards Organization (ISO) to review the case, Xinhua news reported.

It says that the American Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), actual makers of the technology, broke ISO rules when its national bodies voted on new technology to mend security loopholes in the WLAN standard.

China now wants the ISO to investigate the fast-track process to determine "whether the ethical and procedural rules and principles have indeed been violated and whether the ballots have been unfairly influenced by those ethical and procedural violations".

That is what has been done, it chose new technology and in doing so apparently broke rules on voting for procedures.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]


Re:Can we? by Jeremy Erwin (Score:3) Monday May 29, @03:37PM

1 reply beneath your current threshold.




They don't like real crypto. by jthill (Score:2) Monday May 29, @01:32PM

Re:They don't like real crypto. by Whiney Mac Fanboy (Score:3) Monday May 29, @01:36PM

Re:They don't like real crypto. by khallow (Score:2) Monday May 29, @01:55PM

Re:They don't like real crypto. by jthill (Score:2) Monday May 29, @02:06PM

Re:They don't like real crypto. by jthill (Score:3) Monday May 29, @02:52PM

Re:They don't like real crypto. by sumdumass (Score:2) Monday May 29, @03:30PM

Re:They don't like real crypto. by Darkman, Walkin Dude (Score:3) Monday May 29, @07:15PM













1 reply beneath your current threshold.

china? whaa?

(Score:3, Insightful)
by rootofevil (188401) on Monday May 29, @01:19PM (#15425091)
(http://slashdot.org/currentlyoffline...)


since when does china care about patent law?

also, how is it intels fault theyve put a ton of money into researching it? (that may be slightly ignorant of the actual facts, but if they wrote the standards, it stands to reason they created it)

[ Reply to This ]

Re:china? whaa?

(Score:5, Informative)
by Whiney Mac Fanboy (963289) * <whineymacfanboy@gmail.com> on Monday May 29, @01:25PM (#15425113)
(http://whineymacfanboy.googlepages.com/ | Last Journal: Wednesday April 26, @06:11AM)


since when does china care about patent law?

Nothing to do with patent law.

Short version. IEEE submitted 80211i, China submitted WAPI to ISO to be international wireless encryption standards. IEEE won, WAPI lost. China is complaining that IEEE did something bad during the lead up to the voting process. No news sources are reporting what that something was as far as I can see.

So we have nebulous claims of interference in the ISO process. No more, no less.

(I'm not sure whether I dislike/distrust Intel or China more)

[ Reply to This | Parent ]


Re:china? whaa? by JulesLt (Score:3) Monday May 29, @02:33PM

Re:china? whaa? by Whiney Mac Fanboy (Score:2) Monday May 29, @02:42PM

Re:china? whaa? by Babbster (Score:2) Monday May 29, @05:18PM

Re:china? whaa? by Jeremy Erwin (Score:2) Monday May 29, @06:04PM

Re:china? whaa? by Jeremy Erwin (Score:2) Monday May 29, @08:29PM

Re:china? whaa? by Oligonicella (Score:2) Monday May 29, @09:10PM

1 reply beneath your current threshold.




1 reply beneath your current threshold.




1 reply beneath your current threshold.







Re:china? whaa? by sumdumass (Score:2) Monday May 29, @03:35PM

Re:china? whaa? by afidel (Score:2) Monday May 29, @07:53PM




Re:china? whaa? by Nutria (Score:2) Monday May 29, @03:45PM

Re:china? whaa? by antiMStroll (Score:2) Monday May 29, @07:47PM

Re:china? whaa? by afidel (Score:2) Monday May 29, @07:56PM




1 reply beneath your current threshold.




Re:china? whaa? by Zemran (Score:2) Monday May 29, @01:35PM

Re:china? whaa? by oringo (Score:2) Monday May 29, @01:59PM

Re:china? whaa? Huhh? Welll... by davidsyes (Score:2) Monday May 29, @03:34PM

Re:china? whaa? by Gadzinka (Score:3) Monday May 29, @03:53PM

1 reply beneath your current threshold.

Well call the kettle black...

(Score:5, Funny)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 29, @01:19PM (#15425092)


*China* is accusing Intel of unethical behavior?!

Hah!

[ Reply to This ]


Re:Well call the kettle black... by iced_773 (Score:2) Monday May 29, @01:32PM

Re:Well call the kettle black... by Browncoat (Score:1) Monday May 29, @01:45PM

Re:Well call the kettle black... by xutopia (Score:2) Monday May 29, @02:10PM

Re:Well call the kettle black... by rainman_bc (Score:2) Monday May 29, @02:46PM

Re:Well call the kettle black... by Aardpig (Score:1) Monday May 29, @02:51PM

Re:Well call the kettle black... by rainman_bc (Score:2) Monday May 29, @03:48PM

Re:Well call the kettle black... by killjoe (Score:2) Monday May 29, @05:12PM

Re:Well call the kettle black... by click2005 (Score:1) Monday May 29, @07:00PM

Re:Well call the kettle black... by A.Gideon (Score:1) Monday May 29, @08:45PM




Re:Well call the kettle black... by swv3752 (Score:2) Monday May 29, @05:28PM




1 reply beneath your current threshold.







1 reply beneath your current threshold.

Chinese Hypocrisy

(Score:5, Interesting)
by reporter (666905) on Monday May 29, @02:18PM (#15425325)


This legal action that Beijing has taken against Intel is not the first instance of Chinese hypocrisy.
Consider the princelings of China [businessweek.com]. They and their parents are members of the Chinese communist party. These princelings live, for long stretches, in the West and enjoy its freedoms and prosperity. Yet, the parents of the princelings fully support and enforce the draconian Chinese "laws" that crush human rights in China.

I have personally met some of these princelings.

Do they realize their hypocrisy? Yes. Do they care? No.

Here is another, more damning, example. In 2001 in Northern California, the Chinese consulate in San Francisco sponsored an anti-Falun-Gong meeting conducted in Santa Clara, California. Chinese students from San Jose State University, Stanford University, and other neighboring universities, attended the meeting. The Chinese student associations at the respective universities fully supported the anti-Falun-Gong meeting.

These Chinese students enjoy the freedom and prosperity in the West but, actually, support the draconian Chinese "laws" that crush human rights in China.

Do they realize their hypocrisy? Yes. Do they care? No.

By now, you should realize that the authoritarian government in China exists for one reason: the majority of Chinese either support the authoritarian government or are indifferent to it.



[ Reply to This | Parent ]


Re:Chinese Hypocrisy by iminplaya (Score:1) Monday May 29, @04:01PM

Re:Stanford Chinese Student Association by iminplaya (Score:1) Monday May 29, @05:30PM

Falun Gong by Darkman, Walkin Dude (Score:2) Monday May 29, @07:28PM

1 reply beneath your current threshold.




Re:Chinese Hypocrisy by grumpyman (Score:2) Monday May 29, @06:12PM

NAFTA? by danielsfca2 (Score:2) Monday May 29, @08:39PM

Re:Point of Grandparent Post by grumpyman (Score:2) Monday May 29, @06:55PM

Re:Point of Grandparent Post by jez9999 (Score:2) Monday May 29, @07:30PM

Re:Point of Grandparent Post by A.Gideon (Score:1) Monday May 29, @08:29PM

1 reply beneath your current threshold.




Re:Chinese Hypocrisy by A.Gideon (Score:1) Monday May 29, @08:32PM

3 replies beneath your current threshold.




Re:Well call the kettle black... by miffo.swe (Score:2) Monday May 29, @05:52PM

Re:Well call the kettle black... by Trigun (Score:1) Monday May 29, @01:44PM

Re:Well call the kettle black... by eraser.cpp (Score:2) Monday May 29, @01:45PM

Re:Well call the kettle black... by msh104 (Score:2) Monday May 29, @02:33PM

2 replies beneath your current threshold.

Suit against intel?

(Score:1, Flamebait)
by WinterSolstice (223271) on Monday May 29, @01:21PM (#15425101)


More likely they couldn't figure out how to reverse-engineer the products/and or Intel won't cave to them, and therefore they are suing them.

Stands to reason, any country that kills its own populace certainly would do something like this.

-WS

[ Reply to This ]


Re:Suit against intel? by hyfe (Score:3) Monday May 29, @01:30PM

Re:Suit against intel?-Bullies. by hyfe (Score:2) Monday May 29, @04:32PM

1 reply beneath your current threshold.




2 replies beneath your current threshold.




I have this feeling too (mod parent up) by bobamu (Score:1) Monday May 29, @01:31PM

Re:Suit against intel? by ArghBlarg (Score:2) Monday May 29, @01:34PM

Re:Suit against intel? by corrosive_nf (Score:1) Monday May 29, @02:49PM

Re:Suit against intel?

(Score:4, Interesting)
by eraser.cpp (711313) on Monday May 29, @02:10PM (#15425291)
(http://www.gamesurge.net/)


Reverse engineer? 802.11i is an open standard, and it seems like Intel was defending that in the face of what would have been a proprietary standard that China would stand to benefit from.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]


Re:Suit against intel? by iritant (Score:2) Monday May 29, @04:05PM

1 reply beneath your current threshold.







Re:Suit against intel? by radicalnerd (Score:1) Monday May 29, @02:15PM

Re:Suit against intel? by X.25 (Score:2) Monday May 29, @02:23PM

2 replies beneath your current threshold.

In other news ...

(Score:2, Funny)
by garoush (111257) on Monday May 29, @01:24PM (#15425110)
(http://slashdot.org/)


... the world has lunched a case against China's near-monopoly on copyright abuse, human rights, cheap label, ...

[ Reply to This ]


Re:In other news ... by madcow_bg (Score:1) Monday May 29, @05:33PM

1 reply beneath your current threshold.

This is like Freddy Vs Jason

(Score:3, Funny)
by Lord Kano (13027) on Monday May 29, @01:24PM (#15425111)
(http://www.angelfire...epublican/index.blog | Last Journal: Wednesday November 03, @04:02PM)


Evil against Evil. Although I'd argue that since Intel doesn't sell the organs of executed political prisoners, [bbc.co.uk] they are the lesser evil.

So, I guess that makes Intel the Jason in this conflict.

LK

[ Reply to This ]


Re:This is like Freddy Vs Jason by wenit (Score:1) Monday May 29, @01:48PM

Re:This is like Freddy Vs Jason by Browncoat (Score:2) Monday May 29, @02:13PM

Re:This is like Freddy Vs Jason by alfs boner (Score:1) Monday May 29, @02:52PM




Re:This is like Freddy Vs Jason by Enrique1218 (Score:2) Monday May 29, @08:35PM

Re:Cult of death? by RobertLTux (Score:2) Monday May 29, @03:43PM

Re:Cult of death? by m_hemaly (Score:1) Monday May 29, @03:57PM




2 replies beneath your current threshold.

Open standards

(Score:2, Insightful)
by Nerdfest (867930) on Monday May 29, @01:27PM (#15425124)


... and in 2003 tried to force multinationals wanting to sell wireless computer equipment to support its proprietary and secret encryption standard called WAPI.

Exactly how is it better to replace one proprietary standard with another. If they were serious about this, perhaps proposing an open standard would be a bit more constructive.

[ Reply to This ]

Re:Open standards

(Score:5, Insightful)
by stevew (4845) on Monday May 29, @01:37PM (#15425168)
(Last Journal: Monday May 30, @11:02AM)


The thing is - the WAPI standard was a "secret" while the IEEE standard simply isn't. Intel and other multinationals would have to yield their intellectual property to chineese companies to support the WAPI standard. THAT is what the
companies gripped about.

As for the IEEE - it ISN'T just an American body. The truth is that it has an American aspect (that is certainly large and powerful), but IEEE is an INTERNATIONAL organization. How do I know? - I was a member for 15 years. I've even been involved in IEEE standards creation slightly. This is usually done by company representatives. So if Chineese companies were to send representation to IEEE standards efforts, they would have some influence in same.

You're as likely to Siemens or Alcatel, etc involved in these bodies as you are to see Intel, etc. It is more appropriately a mechanism mostly staffed by professional engineers representing their company's interests that create IEEE standards.


[ Reply to This | Parent ]


Re:Open standards by antiMStroll (Score:2) Monday May 29, @07:59PM

Try this...

(Score:2)
by Otter (3800) on Monday May 29, @01:27PM (#15425126)
(Last Journal: Saturday May 27, @09:38PM)


Here's a more helpful link [people.com.cn], that also a) isn't a verbatim AFP story with irritating advertising "links" and b) doesn't have a current forum thread on "The future and the ways of the "Jew"" (which is even more moronic than it sounds -- how dimwitted do you have to be to spell "rich" with a "t"?).

[ Reply to This ]


Re:Try this... by stickfigure (Score:1) Monday May 29, @02:37PM

Re:Try this... by Otter (Score:2) Monday May 29, @04:00PM

Re:Try this... by Beryllium Sphere(tm) (Score:2) Monday May 29, @05:35PM




1 reply beneath your current threshold.




Re:Try this... by pep11 (Score:1) Monday May 29, @03:32PM

Re:Try this... by pep11 (Score:1) Monday May 29, @04:25PM

1 reply beneath your current threshold.




1 reply beneath your current threshold.

Will cause trouble in DC.

(Score:2)
by DAldredge (2353) <SlashdotEmail@GMail.Com> on Monday May 29, @01:29PM (#15425131)
(Last Journal: Monday May 15, @05:44PM)


Our elected leaders in DC will not know what to do about this as it presents a major problem for them. That is who do they support?

Big Business or China?

Since most of them in DC (GOPer & DEMs) are in love with both whose side do they support?


[ Reply to This ]

Re:Will cause trouble in DC.

(Score:5, Funny)
by linzeal (197905) <rakista@gmail.com> on Monday May 29, @01:35PM (#15425157)
(http://revolution23.blogspot.com/ | Last Journal: Wednesday May 10, @09:12PM)


Whichever one gives them more mad props and foil-wrapped bricks of money.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]

Re:Will cause trouble in DC.

(Score:4, Informative)
by eraser.cpp (711313) on Monday May 29, @02:00PM (#15425256)
(http://www.gamesurge.net/)


Colin Powell spoke with Chinese trade officials a while back and got them to halt a program that would have required WiFi equipment being sold in China to support WAPI. The program also would have required foreign companies to partner with a Chinese firm before entering the market.

http://www.infoworld.com/article/04/04/05/HNbarret tochina_1.html?source=rss&url=http://www.infoworld .com/article/04/04/05/HNbarrettochina_1.html [infoworld.com]

FTA: "The U.S. government has also weighed in on the issue. U.S. Secretary of Commerce Donald Evans, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell and U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick, sent a letter to senior Chinese government officials in March expressing concern over the implementation of China's WLAN standard and that the move created a dangerous precedent for using standards as a barrier to international trade."

[ Reply to This | Parent ]



1 reply beneath your current threshold.

Waiting for the DVD...

(Score:2)
by crazyjeremy (857410) * on Monday May 29, @01:29PM (#15425133)
(http://users.mtrx.net/funnypics | Last Journal: Saturday April 29, @12:32PM)


There is to be a 90 minute DVD about this issue. It will be released in the U.S. in July for $14.99 or get it now, burned to a cd... from a Chinese convenience shop near you.

[ Reply to This ]

Bizarre

(Score:2)
by Qwavel (733416) on Monday May 29, @01:42PM (#15425188)


China could have many legit beefs and concerns with regards to western companies (eg. the near-monopoly of Windows on the desktop), so why are they complaining about an IEEE standard supported and implemented by many vendors?

I'm guessing that some person who's company developed the Chinese alternative has an uncle on the Politburo.

If this is the case, it's a shame - there is so much that our governments could do for us if they weren't so corrupt. If this is not the case, then I hope someone will explain what is going on.

[ Reply to This ]

it's all about WAPI

(Score:1)
by totalctrl (974993) on Monday May 29, @01:46PM (#15425204)


WAPI [wikipedia.org]

[ Reply to This ]

Grow up.

(Score:3, Insightful)
by Lally Singh (3427) on Monday May 29, @01:50PM (#15425224)
(http://lspol.blogspot.com/)


Note to slashdot repliers: Enough with the ad hominem attacks. If you don't like what China's doing, talk about what they're doing, not what you like/dislike about China.

We've all got our personal opinions on politics and the politics of technology, but if our words are to mean anything, we've got to appeal to higher standards.

[ Reply to This ]


Re:Grow up. by CodeBuster (Score:2) Monday May 29, @02:31PM

Re:Grow up. by gamer4Life (Score:2) Monday May 29, @02:38PM

Re:Grow up. by grumpyman (Score:2) Monday May 29, @06:25PM




Re:Grow up. by Whiney Mac Fanboy (Score:2) Monday May 29, @02:59PM

Can we all get along? by amightywind (Score:3) Monday May 29, @05:12PM

Re:Grow up. by grumpyman (Score:2) Monday May 29, @06:23PM

Re:Grow up. by ocelotbob (Score:1) Monday May 29, @08:18PM




Re:Grow up. by slashdotnickname (Score:2) Monday May 29, @07:20PM

2 replies beneath your current threshold.

Why the surprise....

(Score:1)
by ibm1130 (123012) on Monday May 29, @02:21PM (#15425332)


Of course they're upset since it means they can't foist their backdoors on anyone without an immense amount of difficulty. Would you trust Beijing gummint encryption?

[ Reply to This ]


Re:Why the surprise.... by wookie geek (Score:1) Monday May 29, @02:31PM

Re:Why the surprise.... by HermanAB (Score:3) Monday May 29, @02:48PM

Re:Why the surprise.... by Darkman, Walkin Dude (Score:2) Monday May 29, @07:30PM




Re:Why the surprise.... by jlarocco (Score:2) Monday May 29, @06:08PM

China Really Shouldn't be Complaining

(Score:3, Insightful)
by CodeBuster (516420) on Monday May 29, @02:24PM (#15425344)


The US Government should tell the Chinese that we will start giving a damn about whether an Intel monopoly hurts their homegrown wireless industry when they start giving a damn about all the software piracy and intellectual property theft going on in their country.

[ Reply to This ]


Re:China Really Shouldn't be Complaining by ScentCone (Score:2) Monday May 29, @03:49PM

Re:China Really Shouldn't be Complaining by Mr2001 (Score:2) Monday May 29, @06:41PM

Re:China Really Shouldn't be Complaining by Shadyman (Score:1) Monday May 29, @07:30PM

can't trust wireless encryption anyway

(Score:3, Informative)
by penguin-collective (932038) on Monday May 29, @03:02PM (#15425464)


It doesn't really matter what wireless encryption standards one uses, you can't trust them anyway. First of all, the companies involved have already demonstrated their incompetence with WEP. Second, I think at this point you have to assume that any encryption that's encoded in a chip has a backdoor in it and that a significant number of people will know about it.

If you want secure wireless communications, you have to use software encryption implemented in open source software.

[ Reply to This ]

see times are changing

(Score:3, Funny)
by icepick72 (834363) on Monday May 29, @03:25PM (#15425535)


China now wants the ISO to investigate the fast-track process to determine "whether the ethical and procedural rules and principles have indeed been violated
Legalize and the right to a democratic networking standard .... China is indeed becoming more westernized all the time ... hahahaha ... I love it.



[ Reply to This ]

Its the IEEE they really have the gripe with...

(Score:5, Interesting)
by MosesJones (55544) on Monday May 29, @03:30PM (#15425542)
(http://service-architecture.blogspot.com/)


As they appear to be suggesting that the IEEE "leant" on ISO to stop the Chinese Wifi standard becoming accepted. Because a large part of this was from Intel, and lets face it suing the IEEE is going to look REAL dumb, they've decided to go after the big bad wolf.

I love the idea of clandestine meetings around ISO and IEEE meetings, more people would go if that was true!


[ Reply to This ]

Usless comment on ISO

(Score:2)
by Registered Coward v2 (447531) on Monday May 29, @05:15PM (#15425852)


It's International Organization for Standardization, despite what the article says.


[ Reply to This ]

Hypocrisy

(Score:1)
by DaMattster (977781) on Monday May 29, @09:23PM (#15426475)


The Chinese should be ones to talk. They are usually far from perfect!

[ Reply to This ]

Re:Another anti-China article

(Score:2)
by phoenix321 (734987) on Monday May 29, @01:48PM (#15425213)
(Last Journal: Monday February 07, @06:44PM)


And nobody will be trying to contain his hysterical laughter as China is going against patents, monopolies and immoral political or economical behaviour. Their accusations contain a fair bit of irony, much like the thief suing the locksmith.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]


"locksmith" and "thief" by totalctrl (Score:1) Monday May 29, @02:19PM

so, whatever technical topics you have

(Score:1)
by totalctrl (974993) on Monday May 29, @02:03PM (#15425272)


if they are about china, they all converge to the cencorship? hmmm. interesting logic.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]

Re:Because China plays fairly!

(Score:2)
by HermanAB (661181) on Monday May 29, @02:29PM (#15425356)


Whaddayamean 'future'? Have a look at the enormous trade imbalance between the USA and China! China lost the wars against Europe a couple hundred years ago and then Japan and Mao did them in again twice more in the last century, but they have made a huge comeback lately.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]

Re:Another anti-China article

(Score:1)
by DAldredge (2353) <SlashdotEmail@GMail.Com> on Monday May 29, @02:55PM (#15425445)
(Last Journal: Monday May 15, @05:44PM)


Have any examples of good articles on china?

[ Reply to This | Parent ]


Re:Another anti-China article by Dan Farina (Score:2) Monday May 29, @04:07PM

1 reply beneath your current threshold.

Re:China just wants to eavesdrop

(Score:2)
by Dystopian Rebel (714995) on Monday May 29, @03:03PM (#15425468)
(Last Journal: Sunday November 06, @06:24PM)


If all the Chinese want to do is eavesdrop, please pick up your telephone, dial any number, and let the NSA know that you feel much safer because of your government's security measures.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]

Re:China just wants to eavesdrop

(Score:1)
by Paolone (939023) on Monday May 29, @03:13PM (#15425501)


Funny how can you say the same about U.S.A.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]

Re:China just wants to eavesdrop

(Score:2)
by Schraegstrichpunkt (931443) on Monday May 29, @03:36PM (#15425562)


I would not trust Chinese encryption, would you?
I don't trust any encryption system that isn't open and well-analyzed, regardless of the country of origin.

That said, I'm sure that some Chinese people are capable of developing strong cryptography. They broke SHA-1 [schneier.com], after all.



[ Reply to This | Parent ]

Re:yup, i second that fuck china comment

(Score:1)
by qzulla (600807) <qzilla@hotmail.com> on Monday May 29, @03:38PM (#15425570)


Where did the hardware in your favorite box come from? The odds are it is from China.

qz


[ Reply to This | Parent ]

Re:Another anti-China article

(Score:2)
by Yvanhoe (564877) on Monday May 29, @04:47PM (#15425768)


I ma not sure if one should consider this article biaised toward or against China. Comments are, of course, that's what they are for, but I read the article as "economical mammoth attacks industrial mammoth" and fail to see a bias.

I think too it is great that monopolies are fought. And if it is unethical protagonists that fight them, well, at least they are good for something.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]

Re:Falun Gong are pacifists

(Score:1)
by Oldav (533444) on Monday May 29, @07:07PM (#15426134)


No prizes for guessing where you are from, no doubt the former land of the free and home of the brave. The cowards are the people who started the war and gave away their rights due to fear. Any brain fuc*ked moron can use violence-it takes brains you so obviously lack to be a pacifist. Crawl back under your rock as*hole. The US-Land of the facist and home of the coward.(Oh yes and the murdering, incompetant, cowardly army)

[ Reply to This | Parent ]



14 replies beneath your current threshold.