Three UK: Banning Huawei will delay our 5G rollout

Three UK is the latest operator to voice concern that banning Huawei equipment will delay its 5G rollout.

David Dyson, CEO of Three UK, warned that such a ban would delay the rollout of 5G services by up to 18 months.

"We've already started to deploy equipment for when we launch 5G in the second half of the year," he said. "So if we had to change vendor now, we would take a big step backwards and probably cause a delay of 12 to 18 months."

The UK is under pressure from the US to ban Chinese 5G equipment citing fears it could be used for surveillance. Huawei continues to deny it poses a national security risk.

"Huawei met all of the standards that the other operators met, and we felt at the end of that process that Huawei was the right choice for our customers and for our business," Dyson said.

In previous generation networks, the UK has allowed the use of the Chinese vendor’s equipment as long as it was checked before use at the Huawei Cyber Security Evaluation Centre (HCSEC) in Banbury.

HCSEC issues annual reports of its findings. Until its latest report, HCSEC was confident that all risks were being successfully mitigated. The most recent edition highlighted concerns about Huawei’s manufacturing process.

Vodafone UK also voiced concerns about potential delays to its 5G network earlier this month if a Huawei ban went ahead. The operator’s CTO, Scott Petty, said that such a ban would require stripping equipment from its existing 4G network.

This legacy problem of using Huawei equipment in Europe was highlighted by Randall Stephenson, the chief executive of AT&T in the US.

“If you have deployed Huawei as your 4G network, Huawei is not allowing interoperability to 5G — meaning if you are 4G, you are stuck with Huawei for 5G,” commented Stephenson at a speech in Washington.

“When the Europeans say we got a problem — that’s their problem. They really don’t have an option to go to somebody else.”

Interested in hearing industry leaders discuss subjects like this? Attend the co-located IoT Tech Expo, Blockchain Expo, AI & Big Data Expo, and Cyber Security & Cloud Expo World Series with upcoming events in Silicon Valley, London, and Amsterdam.

Turns out AT&T’s 5G E is just LTE-A after all

Network measurer OpenSignal has had a look at the performance subscribers are getting from AT&T’s whizzy new 5G Evolution service and it’s nothing special.

“Analyzing Opensignal’s data shows that AT&T users with 5G E-capable smartphones receive a better experience than AT&T users with less capable smartphone models, for example those with an LTE Category below 16,” wrote OpenSignal Analyst Ian Fogg. “But AT&T users with a 5G E-capable smartphone receive similar speeds to users on other carriers with the same smartphone models that AT&T calls 5G E. The 5G E speeds which AT&T users experience are very much typical 4G speeds and not the step-change improvement which 5G promises.”

In other words there’s nothing special going on. If you’ve got a phone that supports LTE-Advanced you’re going to get around 29 Mbps download speed regardless of whether your operator cheekily rebrands it on your phone screen. Unless you’re on Sprint, however, which has a best effort of around 20 Mbps (see table).

Opensignal 5GE table

AT&T was universally mocked when its bright idea of rebranding LTE-A at 5G E first emerged. Sprint, of all companies, even decided to call the lawyers in to challenge the claimed deception, but AT&T continues to insist it was a great idea. Its marketing department presumably won’t be thanking OpenSignal for this latest revelation, but what did they expect?

How international mobile roaming is adapting to policy changes

Mobile roaming allows customers of one network operator (home network) to use the network of another network operator (visited network). The visited network is normally outside the geographical coverage area of the customer’s home network.

Mobile roaming has traditionally provided network operators with an opportunity to gain additional service revenues. However, regulatory policy interventions, such as the EU law to abolish roaming in member states, is having a negative impact on roaming revenues for many network operators across the globe.

Mobile roaming market development

According to the latest market study by Juniper Research, mobile network operator revenues from international mobile roaming are expected to recover slightly, following a decline in 2017 after the introduction of RLAH (Roam Like at Home) in Europe and other markets.

However, overall mobile roaming revenues are expected to stay flat over the next 4 years, representing around 6 percent of total operator billed revenues and $51 billion in value.

RLAH enables mobile communication network subscribers to use their monthly voice, data and messaging allowance while roaming -- without incurring additional service charges.

Juniper found that driven by the introduction of RLAH packages in EU and other regions such as North America and Asia-Pacific, the mobile roaming market witnessed a significant rise in data usage and internet traffic.

In 2017, Juniper estimates that mobile data traffic grew by 200 percent globally, and by 260 percent within Western Europe.

“While the overall proportion of 'silent roamers' continues to fall in many markets, driven by RLAH and cheaper bundles, the market also witnessed operators extending RLAH to more countries over the past 12-18 months. Additionally, a number of neighboring countries are announcing roam-free intra-regional agreements, similar to the EU,” said Nitin Bhas, head of research at Juniper Research.

Juniper estimated that the proportion of silent roamers not using any data roaming services in 2018 accounted for 51 percent of total data roamers globally -- that's down from 72 percent in 2013.

Outlook for further mobile roaming changes

Following Britain’s decision to leave the EU, it has been reported that, in the event of a no-deal Brexit, mobile operators will be able to implement roaming charges. Under such a scenario, Juniper expects that the average roaming cost per active UK roamer could nearly double by the end of 2022 due to higher costs.

However, Juniper considers such a situation to be unlikely and instead mobile network operators will continue to focus on other revenue streams, such as providing managed services in the Internet of Things (IoT) sector.

Interested in hearing industry leaders discuss subjects like this? Attend the co-located IoT Tech Expo, Blockchain Expo, AI & Big Data Expo, and Cyber Security & Cloud Expo World Series with upcoming events in Silicon Valley, London, and Amsterdam.

Chinese operators said to be cautious about 5G investment

Analysts are predicting an underwhelming start to 5G from its biggest market, with China’s giant operators taking a cautious approach to investment.

The Global Times reports that, between them, China Mobile, China Telecom and China Unicom will invest around $5 billion on 5G networks this year. This is apparently in line with “their pragmatic and cautious strategies”. Apparently China Telecom is dropping 9 billion yuan on 5G this year and China Unicom around 7 billion, which by the reports own assertions means China Mobile will be the big spender with 18 billion yuan.

“5G investment will last 10 years, considering the investment speed in 4G,” said some bloke called Huang, apparently. “It’s a pre-commercial time for 5G, so it’s a pre-commercial investment model.”

As you can see in the clip embedded below, another analyst echoed this perspective in a recent interview with Bloomberg. All this speculation about Chinese 5G prospects has probably been prompted by the recent announcement of China Telecom and China Mobile’s 2018 numbers. The two slides from their respective earnings presentations offer some further insight into their immediate 5G plans.

China telecom 2019 5G slide

China mobile 2019 5G slide

 

Three Denmark pushes carrier billing as value add

Cutting through the competitive chaos can be a difficult task, and while Three UK is focusing on convergence and broadband, Three Denmark is making a play to manage the consumers wallet.

With mobile services becoming increasingly utilitised the telcos need to search for a new way to stay relevant and add value to the consumer. Some are diversifying into alternative connectivity services or content, but other are broadening their wings outside the traditional realms of telecommunications.

“It can be difficult to keep track of how many different small amounts you are allowed to spend on apps, movies and games – or how much you get used during a month,” said David Elsass of Three Denmark. “Therefore, many of our customers, both with and without children, have sought greater overview.”

Many telcos have created a very unique position of trust with the consumer. Some might begrudgingly plug credit card details into the Google or Amazon matrix, but almost every consumer trusts their telco to manage their financial details effectively. With more services becoming online-first, or at-least digitally-orientated, a telco can bridge the gap in trust, allowing sceptical consumers to interact with the digital economy.

This is the niche which Three Denmark is looking to fill. Through 3Payment, customers will be able to pool all Apple, Google and Microsoft purchases into their phone bill, streamlining the increasingly fragmented digital economy.

According to a report from DIBS Payment Services, the Danes spent over 20 Danish Krone (roughly £2.3 billion) on online services and subscriptions. As many of these providers are making it so easy to purchase services, keeping track of total spend can be a complicated process. The 3Payment will not only streamline these payments into a single point, but also give the user the option to limit spending.

Three is not necessarily following the status quo in creating additional value to customers, but this is a very interesting approach. Unless the telcos offer something different to consumers, there is a very real risk of walking the path to utilitisation.

One of the main reasons we like this initiative is Three is attempting to add value to the ecosystem in an emerging segment, leaning on one of its attributes. This isn’t an example of a telco attempting to muscle into a competitive segment which is dominated by traditional players which have very different business models, like content, which we see as risky.

Three is leveraging a strength which it has, the trust relationship between it and the consumer, and tackling a pain-point in the digital economy. Simple, forward-looking and innovative.

Nokia admits there may still be some Alcatel Lucent skeletons in the closet

Finnish kit vendor Nokia has filed its annual report with the SEC and in it flagged up some legacy issues from Alcatel Lucent that may still be a problem.

In the lengthy ‘risk factors’ section, Nokia indicates that, even years after it completed the acquisition of Alcatel Lucent, it’s still digging up stuff that may present some kind of threat to the company. Here’s the relevant passage in full.

“During the course of the ongoing integration process, we have been made aware of certain practices relating to compliance issues at the former Alcatel Lucent business that have raised concerns. We have initiated an internal investigation and voluntarily reported the matter to the relevant regulatory authorities, with whom we are cooperating with a view to resolving the matter. The resolution of this matter could result in potential criminal or civil penalties, including the possibility of monetary fines, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, brand, reputation or financial position.”

Asked for further comment on the matter Nokia just stressed that “although this investigation is in a relatively early stage, out of an abundance of caution and in the spirit of transparency, Nokia has contacted the relevant regulatory authorities regarding this review.” There’s no reason not to take that statement at face value at this stage, but while the extent of the material effect this could have on Nokia remains uncapped it will surely remain a significant concern.

Iran is also addressed in the risks section, with Nokia noting the dilemma that, while Europe is relaxing its sanctions against the country, the US is moving in the other direction and ramping them up. “As a European company it will be quite challenging to reconcile the opposing foreign policy regimes of the US and the EU,” it laments.

Since the US has shown an unlimited capacity for vindictiveness towards companies that do business with Iran Nokia has sensible decided not to do any more business there for the time being. “Although we evaluate our business activities on an ongoing basis, we currently do not intend to accept any new business in Iran in 2019 and intend to only complete existing contractual obligations in Iran in compliance with applicable economic sanctions and other trade-related laws,” said the filing.

Lastly the risks section also mentions HMD Global, which licenses the Nokia brand to put on its smartphones. It doesn’t make reference to any specific case but notes “Nokia has limitations in its ability to influence HMD Global in its business and other operations, exposing us to potential adverse effects from the use of the Nokia brand by HMD Global or other adverse development encountered by HMD Global that become attributable to Nokia through association and HMD Global being a licensee of the Nokia brand.” How timely.

T-Mobile uses FWA and digital divide as latest Sprint merger justification

T-Mobile US has announced the launch of an LTE Fixed Wireless Access service, which could address the connectivity needs of 50 million people, assuming the Sprint merger is approved of course.

It hasn’t been billed as an Uncarrier move from T-Mobile, however it has the potential to be quite disruptive. The team has pointed to statistics which suggest 61% of rural customers either have no or only one home broadband services available to them, offering a significant opportunity for CEO John Legere and his magenta army, if they can prove the concept works effectively.

In the first instance, T-Mobile plans to invite 50,000 customers to participate in the live trial, though should the bureaucrats approve the Sprint merger, the team would be able to open this up to 9.5 million customers by 2024. And thanks to 5G, T-Mobile is promising speeds “in excess” of 100 Mbps to 90% of the forecasted FWA footprint, also by 2024.

“Two weeks ago, I laid out our plans for home broadband with the New T-Mobile,” said Legere. “Now, we’re already hard at work building toward that future. We’re walking the walk and laying the foundation for a world where we can take the fight to Big Cable on behalf of consumers and offer real choice, competition and savings to Americans nationwide.”

Although FWA is not a long-term, realistic alternative to fibre, at least not on the current airwaves, T-Mobile could certainly craft a useful position here. Pricing the service at $50 per month, the team suggests customers could save $360 per year, assuming the average monthly cost of home broadband is $80.

For T-Mobile this is perfect timing to plug the benefits of the Sprint merger and gain the interest of influential politicians. With the 2020 Presidential Election machine beginning to crank into first gear, potential candidates and the President himself will be looking for soundbites to rollout to the Middle America rallies. The FWA service ticks two boxes here.

Firstly, with so many rural consumers (and potential voters) either unable to purchase a home broadband service, or only having a single option, T-Mobile is providing an answer. In most cases, the reason home broadband is not available is due to an inability for the telco to prove ROI or the geographical landscape makes it incredibly difficult. FWA addresses these problems.

Secondly, $360 is a lot of money. T-Mobile has a track record of undercutting rivals while delivering a service which is at least on par. This might well be an offering which will attract the interest of many.

Should any politician be involved in forcing the T-Mobile and Sprint merger through, it would be an excellent anecdote for the ambitious politicians to take to potential voters. Not only are they delivering Middle America the internet, they are doing it cheaper than what is available to everyone else around the country.

T-Mobile is promising the merged company will use a low-cost structure to aggressively capture market share by undercutting rivals. This strategy is not only a chance for Legere to further irritate AT&T and Verizon, but it is a massive plug for the merger. In an FCC document, T-Mobile suggests by “monetizing available spectrum and leveraging off of other deployed network assets, the in-home service will be profitable on its own”. The underlying message is quite clear; look what we can do once you greenlight the merger.

Interestingly enough, T-Mobile seems to be fighting the competition concerns in the wireless market, with the opportunity to enhance competition in the wireline market. Soon enough, the merger judges will have to decide what is more important; maintaining the four MNO balance or creating more competition in the home broadband arena.

“These pro-competitive and pro-consumer in-home broadband benefits are clearly merger-specific, verifiable, and compelling considerations to inform the Commission’s overall review of the merger’s effects on competition and the public interest,” the statement to the FCC reads.

Another point which will gain the attention of the pro-consumer politicians and bureaucrats is the promise of free hardware. T-Mobile is promising the LTE router will be provided and installed at no-cost to the consumer, and as soon as 5G is available in the area, the upgraded 5G router will be provided free of charge.

The merger is still hanging in the balance, but the promise of increased competition in the broadband world, especially with the prospect of a race to the bottom, might turn some heads. The pros and cons of the T-Mobile/Sprint merger are starting to become very interesting

Nokia-branded phones sent personal data from Norway to China

Norwegian media is reporting that private data of Nokia 7 Plus users may have been sent to a server in China for months. Finland’s data protection ombudsman will investigate and may escalate the case to the EU.

Henrik Austad, a Nokia 7 Plus user in Norway, alerted the Norwegian public media group NRK in February when he noticed every time he powered on his phone it would ping a server in China and batches of data would be sent. The data included the phone’s IMEI numbers, SIM card numbers, the cell ID of the base station the phone is connected to, and its network address (the MAC address), and they have been sent unencrypted. Investigation by NRK discovered that the recipient of the data is a domain (“http://zzhc.vnet.cn”) belonging to China Telecom.

Nokia 7 Plus pinging China server

Because HMD Global, the company behind the Nokia-branded phones that was set up by former Nokia executives and has licensed the Nokia brand, is a Finland-registered company, the news was quickly brought to the attention of Reijo Aarnio, Finland’s data protection ombudsman . “We started the investigation after receiving the news from the Norwegian Broadcasting Company (NRK) and I also consulted our IT experts. The findings showed this looks rather bad,” Aarnio said.

When talking to the Finnish state broadcaster YLE and the country’s biggest broadsheet newspaper Helsingin Sanomat (HS), the ombudsman also raised a couple of serious concerns he said he would seek clarifications from HMD Global early next week:

  • Are the users aware that their personal data are being transferred to China?
  • On what legal ground, if any, are personal data transferred outside of the EU?
  • Have corrective actions been taken to prevent similar cases from happening again?

Earlier when writing to NRK, Aarnio said his first thought was this could be a breach of GDPR, and, if true, the case would be brought in front of the European Union. (Although Norway is not a EU member state, Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Norway, the three EEA countries which are not part of the EU, agreed to accept GDPR two months after it came into effect in the EU.)

Replying to Telecoms.com’s enquiry, HMD Global, through its PR agency, sent this statement:

We can confirm that no personally identifiable information has been shared with any third party. We have analysed the case at hand and have found that our device activation client meant for another country was mistakenly included in the software package of a single batch of Nokia 7 Plus. Due to this mistake, these devices were erroneously trying to send device activation data to a third party server. However, such data was never processed and no person could have been identified based on this data. This error has already been identified and fixed in February 2019 by switching the client to the right country variant. All affected devices have received this fix and nearly all devices have already installed it.

Collecting one-time device activation data when the phone is taken first time into use is an industry practice and allows manufacturers to activate phone warranty. HMD Global takes the security and privacy of its consumers seriously.

Jarkko Saarimäki, Director Finland’s National Cyber Security Centre (Kyberturvallisuuskeskus), which offered to support the ombudsman if needed, raised another point while talking to YLE, “In cases of this kind, the company should report the case to the Office of the Data Protection Ombudsman (tietosuojavaltuutetun toimisto) and inform the customers of the data security risk.” It looks what HMD Global has done is exactly the opposite: it quietly fixed the issue with a software update.

What exactly happened remains unclear, but the investigation from NRK may shed some light. Further research into the data transfer took NRK investigators to GitHub, where they discovered a set of code that would generate data transmission similar to that on the Nokia 7 Plus in question, and to the same destination. This code resides in a subfolder called “China Telecom”. On the same level there are also subfolders for China Mobile, China Unicom as well as other folders for different purposes. Henrik Lied, the NRK journalist who first reported the case, shared with Telecoms.com this subfolder structure that he captured on GitHub:

GitHub snapshot

Closer analyses of the code in question on GitHub by Telecoms.com seem to have given us a bit more insight. This is what we assume has happened: HMD Global or its ODM partner sourced the code from a developer by the GitHub username of “bcyj” to transfer user data when a phone on China Telecom network is started. But, by mistake, HMD Global has loaded this set of code on a number of Nokia 7 Plus meant for Norway (“our device activation client meant for another country was mistakenly included in the software package of a single batch of Nokia 7 Plus”). When it realised the mistake by whatever means HMD Global released a software update to overwrite this code.

Incidentally it looks the code was originally written for a Chinese OEM LeEco (which is largely defunct now) whose product, e.g. the Le Max 2, was running on the Snapdragon 820 platform with the MSM8996 modem. The modem was later incorporated in the mid-tier platform Snapdragon 660 which powers the Nokia 7 Plus.

There are still quite a few questions HMD Global’s statement does not answer.

  • How many users have been affected? And in what countries? The award-winning Nokia 7 Plus is one of the more popular models from HMD Global, and it is highly unlikely a batch of products were specifically made for the Norwegian market with its limited size. Could the same products have been shipped to other Northern European markets too?
  • Is China Telecom the only operator in China that requires phones on its network to be equipped with a software that regularly sends personal data? We do not find similar programmes under the China Mobile or China Unicom subfolders on the same GitHub location.
  • Is HMD Global the only culprit? Or other OEMs’ products on China Telecom network and on the same Qualcomm modem are also running the same script every time the phone is powered on, but they have not made the same mistake by mixing up regional variants as HMD Global did?
  • On what ground could HMD Global claim that the recipients of the data or any other parties who have access to the data (as they are sent unencrypted), will not be able to identify the individuals (“no person could have been identified based on this data”)? To defend itself, in its statement to NRK, HMD Global referred to the Patrick Breyer vs Bundesrepublik Deutschland case when the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) ruled that whether a certain type of data would qualify as “personal data” should generally need to be assessed based on a “subjective / relative approach”. In the present case HMD Global seems to be arguing that the recipients of the data sent from the phones are not able to establish the identities of the users. It may have its point as China Telecom (or other identities in China that receive the data) does not have the identity information of the users. However, this is a weak defence. The CJEU sided with the German Federal Court of Justice because the point of dispute was dynamic IP only, and the court deemed “that dynamic IP addresses collected by an online media service provider only constitute personal data if the possibility to combine the address with data necessary to identify the user of a website held by a third party (i.e. user’s internet service provider) constitutes a mean “likely reasonably to be used to identify” the individual”, as was summarised by the legal experts Fabian Niemann and Lennart Schüßler. In the HMD Global case, however, a full set of private data were transmitted, not to mention transmitted unencrypted.
  • On what evidence did HMD Global claim that the data transmitted has not been processed or shared with third parties?

To be fair to HMD Global, this is not the first, and by no means the biggest data leaking incident by communication products. For example the IT and communication system at the African Union headquarters, supplied and installed by Huawei, was sending data every night from Addis Ababa to Shanghai for over four years before it was uncovered by accident. Huawei’s founder later claimed that the data leaking “had nothing to do with Huawei”, though it was not clear whether he was denying that Huawei was aware of it or claiming Huawei was not playing an active role in it.

Silicon Valley doesn’t know where to look in the 2020 Presidential race

Traditionally Silicon Valley has supported Democrat Presidential candidates but, with the resident internet giants increasingly becoming a political punching bag, this might change very quickly.

More specifically, Silicon Valley tends to lean towards ‘progressive’ Democrats. Many of those who would want to be included in this list have been running events in California recently to woo voters and potential donors alike, but these are candidates which have not been friendly to the internet giants in recent months.

Some of those who would call themselves ‘progressive’ Democrats include California Senator Kamala Harris, Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren and New Jersey Senator Corey Booker, all of which have made moves against the technology giants for varying reasons. Harris and Booker have sponsored or supported bills which would place greater scrutiny on acquisitions, while Warren made the outlandish promise to break-up big tech and reverse certain acquisitions.

While Warren’s promise might end up meaning very little, we suspect there is too much of a focus on popularity instead of practicality, she has been the focal point of some criticism. Texas Representative Beto O’Rourke, another confirmed candidate, poked fun at Warren’s approach instead suggesting the digital economy should be more tightly regulated, avoiding the difficulties of breaking up incredibly complex, private organizations.

The prospect of new regulations is certainly a better option for the internet giants than Warren’s alternative, however O’Rourke is a bit of a difficult horse to back right now. Looking at O’Rourke’s website, it offers little (in fact, zero) insight into potential policies, but if you want to buy a t-shirt this is the place to go.

Of course, regulatory reform is top of the agenda for many of the potential candidates, and the technology industry is a hot topic here as well. Let’s start with the positives.

The majority of the candidates on show were supporters of net neutrality, battling against FCC Chairman Ajit Pai’s mission to undo the protections. Of the potential candidates, Washington Governor Jay Inslee might steal the crown here.

California might have grabbed the headlines for introducing localised net neutrality rules, potentially paving the path for a constitutional crisis, however it was Inslee who was the first to put pen to paper. Washington’s localised net neutrality rules were introduced in March 2018, six months ahead of California.

More positive news focuses on the Lifeline Program, an initiative which helps poorer families access broadband options. This is another area which felt the fury of Pai’s administration, though several of the candidates opposed the cutting of funds. Warren, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders and New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand are three candidates which would support the Lifeline Program.

Former Maryland Congressman John Delaney is another who would want to shake the infrastructure game up. Sticking with the rural digital divide, Delaney is proposing the formation of an Infrastructure Bank, with funds of $50 billion, to help close the virtual chasm. This might sound attractive, but Delaney shares the same anti-China rhetoric as President Donald Trump. And that has been working out really well.

Should one of these individuals win the keys to the White House, the FCC could be in-line for yet another shake-up.

Now onto the negative side of regulatory reform. The privacy and data-handling activities of the internet giants have come under a lot of scrutiny and criticism over the last few months. This is unlucky to change, and perhaps will become a lot more aggressive as politicians search for PR points. This is a popularity contest after all.

Almost every candidate is calling for more regulatory reform, pulling down the curtain which hides the data machine fuelling the sharing economy. No-one who is involved in the data sharing economy, internet giants and telcos alike, want too many of these practises exposed as it would lead to public backlash. The industry has allowed the education of the general public to fall too far behind technological developments; any bold revelations will be scary.

Two candidates are setting themselves out from the pack with bold regulatory change, Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar and tech entrepreneur Andrew Yang.

Klobuchar’s idea is to introduce a digital dividend on participants of the sharing economy. A levy would be placed on any company which transfers personal data to a third-party, penalising those who monetize data. Those who collect data and use it internally, current or new product development for example, would not be included in the tax.

Yang on the other hand is perhaps proposing the most revolutionary idea; Universal Basic Income (UBI). Effectively, every person over the age of 18 in the US would be entitled to apply to receive $1,000 per month. Yang claims one in three jobs is under risk from automation and AI, therefore the money will help people compensate for this.

The UBI would be funded by consolidating all welfare payments for efficiencies, a new value added tax (VAT), new revenues through increased consumer disposable income and improvements to other areas such as healthcare. However, we suspect this would not cover the outgoings, so it would not be unfair to assume a tax would be placed on those companies benefiting from automation.

Another development mid-way through last year was an attack on the state sales tax regime which the eCommerce giants have enjoyed for so long. These rules would effectively end tax avoidance benefits so many national players have enjoyed by locating head quarters in states like Delaware. Gillibrand, Sanders, Warren and Klobuchar were Senators to voted in favour of the state led digital sales tax.

What is worth noting is policies are still in their early days, and the genuine lobbying from industry will not have started yet. Who knows what the headline policies will be in the run-up to the 2020 Presidential Election, but the Democrats aren’t looking as Silicon Valley friendly as previous years.

Huawei’s US lawsuit will either backfire or prove its innocence

Huawei's lawsuit against the US government is a bold gamble that will either backfire or prove claims about the Chinese firm are unfounded.

The company has been embattled with the US for many years but has recently come under increased pressure ahead of 5G rollouts. Huawei filed a lawsuit against the US government earlier this month for what it called ‘unconstitutional’ treatment.

The US has been pressuring its allies not to use equipment from Huawei citing national security concerns that Beijing could request the firm to conduct surveillance.

Huawei has denied these allegations, and an official argued last year the firm would not be complicit in such activities as being caught even once would be terminal for its global business.

The US is yet to make any evidence about Huawei public, which has led some to wonder if any exists or whether the claims are part of the wider ‘trade war’ against China from the Trump Administration. Huawei must feel confident of their innocence as evidence will come to light as part of the case.

He Weifang, a professor at Peking University, told the South China Morning Post:

“It would be fantastic if the US judicial system could help to reveal Huawei’s ownership structure and its relationship with the Chinese government, which has remained mysterious to the Chinese public.

The US doesn’t conceal the judicial procedure from the public. The legal reasoning and adversary system in the United States is charming, the process of the case will be a great legal education to the Chinese public and its authority.”

Huawei founder Ren Zhengfei has often been the focus of concerns due to his service as a high-ranking general in the People's Liberation Army. In a rare interview with the BBC, Zhengfei acknowledged Huawei has a Communist Party committee although highlighted that all companies must as a matter of law.

Critics have claimed that companies are compelled by law to comply with state requests to conduct things such as surveillance. Huawei maintains no such law exists, and Zhengfei said he'd “shut the company down” before complying with such a request.

“It’s hard to see why Huawei decided to sue the US government. If there is no chance of winning at all, they would not have taken this action,” added He.

“However, Huawei might also end up with defeating itself if there is enough evidence for the US government to prove it harms US national security.”

Speaking to a committee recently, German intelligence officers said Huawei is ‘untrustworthy’ based on “past security-related events” which suggests the Germans have evidence against the company. As close security partners, this may be the same as held by the US.

Hua Chunying, a spokeswoman for China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, claims allegations of security threats posed by Chinese companies were being used to suppress their growth.

“We urge relevant parties to cease the groundless fabrications and unreasonable restrictions toward Huawei and other Chinese companies, and create a fair, good and just environment for mutual investment and normal cooperation by both sides’ companies,” Chunying said.

Some Trump administration members have urged the president to sign an order banning Chinese equipment but it appears set to be decided by the ongoing trade talks. US operators are currently able to use Huawei equipment although most choose not to as it makes them ineligible for government contracts.

The president said at a press conference last month: “I don’t want to block out anybody if I can help it. If there is a security issue, we don’t have a choice. It is something we will talk about, but I want fair competition.”

Telecoms will keep you posted on all developments in Huawei’s lawsuit against the US government.

Interested in hearing industry leaders discuss subjects like this and sharing their experiences? Attend the Cyber Security & Cloud Expo World Series with upcoming events in Silicon Valley, London, and Amsterdam to learn more.