Hacker News Reader

This much better and spells out clear reasons. Looks like industrial espionage. Done I don’t know the structure of the company can’t tell if it’s reasonable or not to shut down the whole company. Of course it could be, if they were set up intentionally to do just that with some stooges along the way.

While the administrative action is opaque, the B.C. Supreme Court isn't, and they found Bluevec guilty of "misusing its confidential information and selling a direction-finding code to Chinese anti-drone company".

That, to me, doesn't "look like industrial espionage", but rather is pretty clear cut.

> That, to me, doesn't "look like industrial espionage", but rather is pretty clear cut.

If the article is to be believed, it's two chinese co-workers who transferred to canada and started two competing firms in canada. And one stole tech from the other. My advice is stop reading comments from 'China hawk' shills like JumpCrisscross but read the article.

'The two met when working in the Beijing office of Fortinet, a cybersecurity firm. Both transferred to Fortinet’s Vancouver office and became good friends. After Liu left the company in 2016 to form SkyCope and work on developing anti-drone technology, Jia joined him months later as SkyCope’s chief technology officer.'

The courts found that they sold the tech to a Chinese-owned company ("selling a direction-finding code to Chinese anti-drone company Beijing Lizheng Technology"). In the defence space, this is an issue of national security.

I've only made reference to the article, literally quoting it.

> He stole anti-drone technology from a Canadian company and gave it to China.

No. SkyCope itself is owned by a Chinese company, Shenzhen Shengkong. Also, Bluevec did not "give" the anti-drone tech to "China". It sold it to a (different) Chinese company for $800,000.

> [182] The defendants’ submissions characterize the Bluvec Code as “rudimentary” and say it did not use anything other than technology that was commonly known in the industry. However, Dr. Pan admitted that, while he was still working at Skycope, he wrote direction-finding code for Mr. Jia that later became part of the Bluvec Code. Bluvec subsequently sold that direction-finding technology to Lizheng for $800,000.

> [188] Skycope submits that it and its parent companies have suffered detriment by being forced into extensive litigation in China and that Bluvec and Lizheng’s entry into the market has harmed Skycope and Shengkong’s market position in China. ...

> [222] ... Similarly, there is no evidence that Skycope (including its parent, Shengkong) operates outside of Canada and China.

https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2023/2023bcsc1288/2023...

> SkyCope itself is owned by a Chinese company

Thanks. Edited.

Given Ottawa is using a national security law, it would appear there would be ring-fencing around SkyCope that these companies didn’t have. Curious if SkyCope has military customers in China like at least one of these companies allegedly did [1].

> Bluevec did not "give" the anti-drone tech to "China". It sold it to a (different) Chinese copmany

Don’t court records in China show the company he “sold” it to is controlled by him?

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20240105144551/https://pegauni.c...

> TL; DR Founder appears to be a serial liar per court decisions in China and Canada. He stole anti-drone technology from a Canadian company and gave it to China.

You never stop with the anti-china propaganda.

'The two met when working in the Beijing office of Fortinet, a cybersecurity firm. Both transferred to Fortinet’s Vancouver office and became good friends. After Liu left the company in 2016 to form SkyCope and work on developing anti-drone technology, Jia joined him months later as SkyCope’s chief technology officer.'

It is one chinese guy stealing from another chinese guy.

> the anti-china propaganda

I am a China hawk. But nothing here implicates the CCP.

> It is one chinese guy stealing from another chinese guy

One, their ethnicity and even nationality are irrelevant.

Two, that was already adjudicated. This action is about one person--with adverse court records in two countries--stealing defence technology and "selling" it to a company he controls in China. The stealing was a civil matter. The exfiltration is a national-security one.

> I am a China hawk.

You are also 'american' too right?

> But nothing here implicates the CCP.

Yet you wrote: "He stole anti-drone technology from a Canadian company and gave it to China."

> One, their ethnicity and even nationality are irrelevant.

Sure it does. Why else would you have written : "... and gave it to China."

It's amazing how certain kinds of 'hellish flamebait' are allowed by dang.

> You are also 'american' too right

This happens in Canada.

> Why else would you have written : "... and gave it to China."

Because he gave it to China! If I transfer military technology from idk Russia to my American company, I gave that kit to America. Whether I’m American is irrelevant. (And that action per se doesn’t mean I coördinated with the CIA.)

Countries can use agents of backgrounds other than their dominant one. Not every Russian spy is of a Russian ethnicity.