又遭美国司法部调查，华为最新回应：细数美国政府打压“九宗罪”

（观察者网讯）9月3日，华为公共及政府事务部在心声社区刊登《有关媒体报道称美国司法部对华为展开新调查的声明》，该声明提及近日美国华尔街日报报道了美国司法部针对华为进行了新的所谓窃取商业秘密刑事调查。华为声明表示，华为坚信自主研发的产品不侵权，并在声明中介绍了事情前后经过以及提供详实的材料予（附图以其外观设计专利为例和华为产品进行对比说明）。

华为的声明指出，最近一段时间以来，美国政府不仅动用其政治和外交影响力，游说各国政府禁止使用华为设备，更是动用其国家机器，滥用司法、行政权力，采用各种不正当手段骚扰、影响华为或合作伙伴的正常业务。包括：

1、通过执法机构威胁、恐吓、要挟、利诱、策反华为在职或离职员工为其工作；

2、以不正当的方式搜查、扣押、甚至拘捕华为员工或合作伙伴；

3、设置各种陷阱或圈套，冒充华为员工，创造案件，试图形成对华为不利的不实指控；

4、采取网络攻击的方式不正当的刺探华为的内部网络和信息系统；

5、通过FBI上门约谈的方式进行施压，要求华为员工作为内应配合获得华为信息；

6、动员和策划与华为有商业合作或有商业冲突的公司对华为进行不实指控或钓鱼；

7、搜集各类虚假的针对华为的负面报道，并以此为依据展开调查；

8、将历史上已经解决的民事案件，以技术秘密窃取等理由，进行选择性的刑事调查或起诉；

9、通过恐吓、拒发签证、扣货等方式，阻挠正常的商业活动和技术交流。

华为屡遭不公正待遇，此番声明可以说是用中英文详细列出了美国政府打压华为的“九宗罪”。华为在声明中表示，美国政府采取的这些恶劣行为的目的无非是希望将华为抹黑为通过盗窃他人商业秘密发展起来的公司，打击和限制华为的全球领先地位。我们对此坚决反对。

以下内容来自华为心声社区：

8月30日，华尔街日报报道了美国司法部针对华为进行所谓窃取商业秘密刑事调查，有关该报道提及的Oliveira等事件和美国政府近期的调查行为，华为严正声明如下：

2014年5月28日，在葡萄牙公民Rui Pedro Oliveira主动要求下，华为美国子公司人员与其进行了一次短暂会晤，会上Oliveira先生主动推销其伸缩摄像头设计方案。华为并未使用Oliveira先生的设计方案。2017年，华为开始销售自主研发的EnVizion360全景摄像头，而华为的研发团队从未接触过源于Oliveira先生的信息。

华为的设计方案是不可伸缩、带两侧鱼眼镜头的全景摄像头，与Oliveira先生可伸缩的单侧镜头的非全景摄像头设计方案完全不同。从2018年4月到2019年3月，Oliveira先生通过邮件声称华为公司的EnVizion360摄像头侵犯其所持有的美国专利，并多次威胁如果华为不支付其高额费用，将通过媒体和政治途径给华为施加压力。

华为坚信自主研发的产品不侵权，并提供了详实的材料予以证明（附图以其外观设计专利为例和华为产品进行对比说明），但Oliveira先生继续通过媒体扭曲事实、抹黑华为，甚至试图通过其政府高层给华为施压使华为屈服并支付其高额费用。在不堪其扰的情况下，为维护华为的声誉及合法权益，2019年3月26日，华为先行向美国法院提出请求确认未使用Oliveira专利，这本是一个非常普通的民事诉讼程序，但Oliveira先生拒绝接受法庭传票的送达，拖延参与美国法庭程序。这种明显的利用当前的国际政治环境、通过媒体歪曲事实，进行投机的行为，不应被鼓励，更不应成为美国司法部刑事调查的事由。

一段时间以来，美国政府不仅动用其政治和外交影响力，游说各国政府禁止使用华为设备，更是动用其国家机器，滥用司法、行政权力，采用各种不正当手段骚扰、影响华为或合作伙伴的正常业务。包括：

1、 通过执法机构威胁、恐吓、要挟、利诱、策反华为在职或离职员工为其工作；

2、 以不正当的方式搜查、扣押、甚至拘捕华为员工或合作伙伴；

3、 设置各种陷阱或圈套，冒充华为员工，创造案件，试图形成对华为不利的不实指控；

4、 采取网络攻击的方式不正当的刺探华为的内部网络和信息系统；

5、 通过FBI上门约谈的方式进行施压，要求华为员工作为内应配合获得华为信息；

6、 动员和策划与华为有商业合作或有商业冲突的公司对华为进行不实指控或钓鱼；

7、 搜集各类虚假的针对华为的负面报道，并以此为依据展开调查；

8、 将历史上已经解决的民事案件，以技术秘密窃取等理由，进行选择性的刑事调查或起诉；

9、 通过恐吓、拒发签证、扣货等方式，阻挠正常的商业活动和技术交流。

事实上，所有这些所谓的刑事案件，没有涉及任何一项核心技术，也没有足够的事实和证据支撑其指控。美国政府采取的这些恶劣行为的目的无非是希望将华为抹黑为通过盗窃他人商业秘密发展起来的公司，打击和限制华为的全球领先地位。我们对此坚决反对。

华为的发展，得益于三十年的持续的研发投入和全球十八万员工的持续努力，得益于客户、供应商和合作伙伴对我们的信任和支持。世界上没有任何一家企业可以通过“偷窃”成为全球领先的高科技企业。

附：Oliveira外观设计专利和华为Envizion360摄像头对比，两者明显不同：

1、Oliveira外观设计是单向镜头伸缩，只有一侧有镜头。

2、华为是两侧均有镜头，不能伸缩，具有Oliveira所没有的大弧面。

以下是英文声明：

Media Statement Regarding Reported US DoJ Probes into Huawei

On August 30, 2019, the Wall Street Journal reported that the U.S. Department of Justice probed Huawei on alleged theft of smartphone-camera patents. These allegations are false. Huawei would like to issue the following clarifications regardingthese claims, as well asrecent probes by theU.S. government mentioned in the Wall Street Journal’sreport:

On May 28, 2014,representatives from Huawei’s U.S. subsidiary met with Mr. Rui Pedro Oliveira per his request. Atthe meeting, Mr. Oliveira pitchedhiscamera design, which he alleged to have U.S. patent pending, to Huawei. Huaweidid not usehis design.

In 2017, Huawei started to sell EnVizion 360 panoramic camera, independently designed and developed by Huawei’s employees having no access to Mr. Oliveira’sinformation. Unlike Mr. Oliveira’s single-lens and expandable design, Huawei’s camera was non-expandable, featured lenses on both sidesdesigned for panoramic pictures.

Beginning inApril 2018 and continuing throughMarch 2019, Mr. Oliveira began e-mailing Huawei, claiming that the EnVizion360 had infringed hisU.S. patents. In his e-mails, he repeatedly issued threats, saying that if Huawei did not pay an extortionate amount of money,he would go to the media and exert pressure through political channels.

Huawei categorically rejects Mr. Oliveira’s claims of patent infringement, and has provided detailed documents in support of its stance(see visual comparisons of the two products below as example). Nevertheless, Mr. Oliveira proceeded to feed a false narrative to the media in an attempt to tarnish Huawei’s reputation. Hemade further efforts to exert pressure on Huawei through senior government officials, trying to make the company cede to his demands and hand over large sums of money.

On March 26, 2019, in order to defend the company’sreputation and protect itslegitimate rights and interests, Huawei filed a complaint against Mr. Oliveira before U.S. court for a declaration of non-infringement of Mr. Oliveira’s U.S. patents. This isa normalcivil procedure. However, Mr. Oliveira declinedto accept the service of Huawei’s complaint and summons, resulting in delaying of the court proceedings.

It’s clear that Mr. Oliveira is taking advantage of the current geopolitical situation. He is pushing a false narrative through the media in an attempt to capitalize on a dispute.This type of behavior should not be encouraged, nor should it be considered rational justification for a criminal investigation bythe U.S. Department of Justice.

For the past several months, the U.S. government has been leveragingitspolitical and diplomatic influence to lobby other governments tobanHuawei equipment.Furthermore, it has been using every tool at its disposal – including both judicial and administrative powers, as well as a host of other unscrupulous means – todisrupt the normal business operations of Huawei and itspartners. These include:

 Instructing law enforcement to threaten, menace, coerce, entice, and incite both current and former Huawei employees to turn against the company and work for them

 Unlawfully searching, detaining, and even arrestingHuawei employees andHuawei partners

 Attempting entrapment, or pretending to beHuawei employees to establish legal pretensefor unfounded accusations against the company

 Launching cyber attacks to infiltrate Huawei’s intranet and internal information systems

 Sending FBI agents to the homes of Huawei employees and pressuring them to collect information on the company

 Mobilizing and conspiringwithcompanies that work with Huawei, or have a business conflict with Huawei, to bring unsubstantiated accusations against the company

 Launching investigations based on false media reports that target the company

 Digging up old civil cases that have already been settled, and selectively launching criminal investigations or filing criminal charges against Huawei based on claims of technology theft

 Obstructing normal business activities and technical communications through intimidation, denying visas, detaining shipment, etc.

The fact remains that none of Huawei’s core technology has been the subject of any criminal case brought against the company, and none of the accusations levied by the U.S. government have been supported with sufficient evidence. We strongly condemnthe malign, concerted effort by the U.S. government todiscredit Huawei and curbitsleadership position in the industry.

Huawei has invested heavily in R&D for more than 30 years. We have more than 180,000 hard-working employees around the globe. We have won the trust and support ofour customers, suppliers, and partners.

This is the source of our company’s success. No company becomes a global leader in their fieldthrough theft.

Appendix: Comparison ofOliveira’s design patent and Huawei’s EnVizion 360 camera

1. Oliveira’s design has only one single, expandable zoom lens on one side of the device.

2. Huawei’s device has lenses on both sides, and they are contained in a large convex housing. Neither expand from the surface of the device.