Archive: https://archive.today/grz2q
From the post:
>Last October, dronemaker DJI sued the US Department of Defense, arguing it should no longer face the stigma of being listed as a “Chinese Military Company” and continue to risk business as a result. It just lost. While US District Court judge Paul Friedman “cannot conclude” that DJI is “indirectly owned by the Chinese Communist Party,” he found that the DoD has broad discretion to decide which companies do and do not belong on the list of Chinese military companies.
Archive: https://archive.today/grz2q
From the post:
>>Last October, dronemaker DJI sued the US Department of Defense, arguing it should no longer face the stigma of being listed as a “Chinese Military Company” and continue to risk business as a result.
It just lost.
While US District Court judge Paul Friedman “cannot conclude” that DJI is “indirectly owned by the Chinese Communist Party,” he found that the DoD has broad discretion to decide which companies do and do not belong on the list of Chinese military companies.
Login or register