Chinese Couple Found Guilty Of Stealing Crap From GM

by Bertel Schmitt

December 1st, 2012 12:50 AM

A Detroit court found a former GM engineer and her husband guilty of conspiring to steal hybrid car trade secrets. Their lawyers unsuccessfully argued that there were no secrets to steal. Ed Niedermeyer had said that for years.

Shanshan Du and her husband Yu Qin face lengthy prison sentences. Sentencing will occur in February 2013.

In 2010, the couple was indicted on charges including conspiracy for allegedly stealing GM hybrid technology between 2003 and 2005. According to the indictment, Du copied thousands of pages of GM trade secrets onto a portable computer hard drive five days after accepting a buyout offer.

When we covered this story in 2010, our now Editor Emeritus Ed Niedermeyer wrote:

“The real story here is just how stupid Du and Qin were for targeting The General’s hybrid technology between 2003 and 2005.

To this day GM still has yet to develop a commercially successful hybrid drivetrain, and at the time of the alleged theft, only the highly unsuccessful BAS “mild hybrid” system (production start in 2006), the PHT truck mild hybrid system (production in 2005), and expensive, complicated “two-mode” hybrid system (production in 2008) were on track for eventual production. What Chery, Du or Qin saw in that technology is utterly baffling… and their attempt at industrial espionage may well have been the greatest compliment ever paid to GM’s long-abortive attempt to catch up with Toyota and Honda in the area of hybrid technology.”

As proof, Niedermeyer entered the video which we play again above. At the four minute mark, a former top executive at GM testifies that back then, there was nothing worth stealing.

The couple’s lawyers used the same line of reasoning, but could not convince the Detroit jury. When the matter goes to appeal, possibly the attorneys can call Lutz as a witness. Or Niedermeyer.

#BertelSchmitt #China #IntellectualProperty

Comments

Join the conversation

8 of 42 comments

Rpol35 on Dec 02, 2012

Yawn, more anti-GM bloviating. Must have been a slow news day.

Like Reply
- See 5 previous
- Highdesertcat on Dec 02, 2012
  
  I think you missed the real nitty-gritty here. No matter. The people were guilty of stealing even though what they stole was worthless. It's more akin to someone stealing old newspapers off your front porch than it is to some homeless person stealing food to feed their starving family. Both are guilty of theft. The stuff they stole from GM was more like old newspapers than food for a hungry family.
  
  Like
- Rpol35 on Dec 02, 2012
  
  Highdesertcat: I completely agree with you, stealing is stealing, period. It's the characterization that what was stolen is "crap" because it was developed by GM that is bothersome. I don't agree with you, however, that it was necessarily "worthless". That is the opinion of an extremely anti-GM Editor in Chief. Besides, this issue has been circulating in the news for weeks.
  
  Like
- Highdesertcat on Dec 03, 2012
  
  @highdesertcat rpol35, not to belabor the point but "a former top executive at GM testifies that back then, there was nothing worth stealing." Look at the time frame when these thefts occurred, 2003 - 2005. This was a time when GM was busy reverse-engineering the Prius to get a handle on how Toyota was doing their Hybrid thing. GM had nothing. Not even a source for automotive Lithium batteries. Of course that was not what was brought to trial. That was the issue of stealing. This issue has indeed been circulating in the news for weeks and the only reason it has legs is because what these two people stole was not of any value to anyone, least of all GM. If what they had stolen was actually of value, like let's say intellectual property such as music or videos or Apple proprietary secrets, there would have been sanctions and tariffs and a bunch of punitive measures against China like the US took against Israel during the Jonathan Pollard spying incident. That's why Pollard is serving life and the US isn't going to let him ever go to Israel. That boy will die in a US penitentiary and will never see the promised land. The worst and most severe punishment he could ever get. Israel maintains it is cruel and unusual. And that argument continues to have legs as well. My point, these thieves stole something that had no intrinsic value and their efforts were a waste of time and an exercise in futility. And if you really think about it, GM hasn't had any ideas on the scale of Ford or Chrysler since before, during or after the bankruptcy. GM is struggling if you compare them to Ford or Chrysler. Ford and Chrysler have relevant, up-to-date products. GM promises the world they will too, at some future date. Always some future date. That's not GM bashing. That happens to be the way many industry analysts see it. If those analysts thought that GM was such a good deal, we, the people, would not be sitting on nearly worthless new-GM stock. Many believe it is only going to get worse for GM. If I had been writing the story, I'm afraid I would have also written that what was stolen was of no value, based on what GM stated. Considering the Volt, the most advanced hybrid GM has, and what the Chinese bring to market now, GM is light-years ahead of China. And seven years is a long time to implement what was stolen into a current Chinese Hybrid. The Prius was dissected and reverse engineered in two weeks, and it didn't even require total disassembly. Certainly the Chinese could have incorporated valuable GM secrets in seven years into their products, if there was anything there of substance.
  
  Like
- Sunridge place on Dec 03, 2012
  
  @highdesertcat HDC '“a former top executive at GM testifies that back then, there was nothing worth stealing.” You do realize that it wasn't actual 'testimony' as in under oath testimony right? That was simply Bertel's line. Watch the damn interview...especially at the 4:00 point. Its not like a judge slipped in with a bible and a deposition broke out. Absolutely hilarious that you think theft of 'music or videos' by a Chinese citizen would lead to formal US sanctions against China. Your grasp on this topic is outstanding.
  
  Like
- TCBRacing on Dec 03, 2012
  
  @highdesertcat HDC - Struggling with this statement as being anything but GM Bashing... "GM is struggling if you compare them to Ford or Chrysler. Ford and Chrysler have relevant, up-to-date products." Do you have any specific examples? On the contrary there is the hugely successful, only B-Segment vehicle built in the US, the Chevy Sonic, the only domestic vehicle that dared to take on the iconic 3 Series (and beat or at least equal it), the Cadillac ATS, the only 4 Door A-Segment that also comes standard with power windows, A/C and Cruise, the Chevy Spark. Not to mention the high volume Cruze that will soon have the only compact diesel from any of the domestics. Let's see what Ford has that is "up-to-date"... Hmmm... Ecoboost? Isn't that just turbo charging? Sync? Fail... What about Fiat/Chrysler? Hmmm... 8 Speed transmissions? Ok, give them that. It sure is A LOT better than the 5 speed it replaced. What else? Hmmm... Lot of promising about small truck diesels but nothing yet... Jeep... No nothing there... You got me on this one. Yeah, still not seeing your point.
  
  Like
- Rpol35 on Dec 03, 2012
  
  @highdesertcat Well we've gone from auto technology to Apple to pirated videos to Chinese sanctions to Israeli spys and then back to cars with Chrysler's up-to-date technology(?) but not to belabor the point..... Stealing is stealing; what has or does not have value is a subjective call. They got caught and that's it.
  
  Like
Panzerfaust on Dec 02, 2012

Stupid criminals are still criminals. Itellectual property can have more value than being copied, it can also be important to know the direction your rivals are going, how much money they're investing in a project. And not to defend GM, but just because a technology isn't cutting edge, that doesn't mean that the right application couldn't be profitable.

Like Reply

Recent Comments

Kwik_Shift I was a GM fan boy until it ended in 2013 when I traded in my Avalanche to go over to Nissan.
Stuart de Baker I didn't bother to read this article. I'll wait until a definitive headline comes out, and I'll be surprised if Tesla actually produces the Cybertruck. It certainly looks impractical for both snowy and hot sunny weather.
Stuart de Baker This is very interesting information. I was in no danger of buying a Tesla. I love my '08 Civic (stick), and it feels just as responsive as when I bought it 11 years ago with 35k on the clock (now 151k), and barring mishaps, I plan to keep it for the next 25 years or so, which would put me into my mid-90s, assuming I live that long. On your information, I will avoid renting Teslas.
RHD The only people who would buy this would be those convinced by a website that they are great, and order one sight-unseen. They would have to have be completely out of touch with every form of media for the last year. There might actually be a few of these people, but not very many. They would also have to be completely ignorant of the Hyundai Excel. (Vinfast seems to make the original Excel look like a Camry in comparison.)
RHD This was awesome, in 1978. Now, it's very much obsolete - thirsty, slow, ponderous, noisy, rough, and dated design even in its time. Still, someone who wants to recreate some distant memories will buy it and restore it and enjoy it, and the seller just has to find that particular individual.