abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb

The content is also available in the following languages: 简体中文, 繁體中文

Lawsuit

19 May 2011

Author:
Business & Human Rights Resource Centre

Cisco Systems lawsuits (re China)

See all tags

Status: ONGOING

Date lawsuit was filed
19 May 2011
Unknown
Human Rights Defender
Location of Filing: United States of America
Location of Incident: China
Type of Litigation: Transnational

Companies

AT&T United States of America Technology, telecom & electronics
American Express United States of America Finance & banking
Amgen United States of America Biotechnology
Arab Bank Israel Finance & banking
Amazon.com United States of America Clothing & textile, Retail, Internet & social media, Technology: General, Express delivery, Artificial Intelligence (AI), Entertainment
AirScan United States of America Security companies
Bull (part of Atos) France Technology, telecom & electronics
Blackwater United States of America Security companies
Baidu China Software & Services, Technology: General, Internet & social media, Finance & banking
Bain Capital Ventures United States of America Finance & banking
Cisco Systems United States of America Technology, telecom & electronics
Chiquita United States of America Agriculture & livestock
CACI United States of America Military/defence
Comcast United States of America Media & publishing: General, Technology: General
Chevron United States of America Oil, gas & coal
Drummond United States of America Mining
Daimler AG Germany Automobile & other motor vehicles
ExxonMobil United States of America Oil, gas & coal
eBay United States of America Retail
Meta (formerly Facebook) United States of America Internet & social media, Advertising & marketing, Technology: General
General Electric (GE) United States of America Renewable energy, Diversified/Conglomerates
Google (part of Alphabet) United States of America Technology: General, Advertising & marketing, Artificial Intelligence (AI), Finance & banking, Entertainment, Internet & social media
Honeywell United States of America Technology, telecom & electronics
Hewlett-Packard (HP) United States of America Technology, telecom & electronics
Huawei China Technology, telecom & electronics
Hudbay Minerals Canada Mining
Intel United States of America Technology, telecom & electronics
IBM United States of America Technology, telecom & electronics
Microsoft United States of America Technology: General, Internet & social media
McAfee (part of Intel) United States of America Software & Services
Nestlé Switzerland Food & beverage
Occidental Petroleum United States of America Oil, gas & coal
Pfizer United States of America Pharmaceutical
PayPal United States of America Finance & banking, Technology: General, Internet & social media
Rio Tinto United Kingdom Mining
Shell plc United Kingdom Oil, gas & coal
TotalEnergies (formerly Total) France Oil, gas & coal, Energy
Titan (now L-3 Titan) United States of America Technology, telecom & electronics
X Corp. (formerly Twitter) United States of America Internet & social media, Technology: General
United Technologies United States of America Diversified/Conglomerates
Unocal (part of Chevron) United States of America Oil, gas & coal
Verizon United States of America Technology, telecom & electronics, Entertainment
Websense United States of America Software & Services
Yahoo! United States of America Technology: General, Internet & social media
Travelers United States of America Insurance
Netsweeper Canada Technology, telecom & electronics
Nexa Technologies (formerly Amesys) France Military/weapons/security equipment: General, Technology, telecom & electronics
Blue Coat United States of America Technology, telecom & electronics
Bing (part of Microsoft) United States of America Software & Services

Sources

In 2011 two separate lawsuits were filed in US court against Cisco Systems regarding the company's activities in China. Both sets of plaintiffs allege that Cisco helped the Chinese government build computer systems used to track and prosecute political dissidents. This tracking led to many of the plaintiffs being arrested, arbitrarily detained, tortured, and killed.

案例简介:思科系统公司诉讼案(中国)


In mid-2011 two separate lawsuits were filed in US federal court against Cisco Systems and its top executives regarding the company's activities in China. Human Rights Foundation filed a lawsuit on 19 May 2011 in California on behalf of 11 members of the Chinese Falun Gong movement against Cisco and certain of its executives, including CEO John Chambers. The second lawsuit was filed on 6 June 2011 in Maryland on behalf of three jailed Chinese writers. Both sets of plaintiffs allege that Cisco helped the Chinese Government build computer systems used to track and prosecute dissidents.

The lawsuits allege Cisco designed and maintains a censorship network known as the Golden Shield Project, with the understanding that Golden Shield would be used by the Chinese authorities to monitor and access private internet communications, identify anonymous blog authors and to block online publications critical of the Chinese Communist Party. The Falun Gong plaintiffs allege that, by using Cisco's network, the Chinese authorities tracked the online activities of the Falun Gong movement. They allege that some of the Falun Gong members were arrested, arbitrarily detained, tortured and killed, while others disappeared.

The second lawsuit alleges that the defendants' role in creating the Golden Shield enabled the Chinese Government to identify and jail each of the plaintiffs. The writers had each published articles on the internet supporting democracy and human rights and critical of the Chinese Communist Party. Each writer alleges that he was subsequently detained and tortured by the Chinese authorities. They brought the lawsuit under the Alien Tort Statute.

Cisco denies all accusations, claiming it sells the same equipment in China that it sells in other countries around the world.

In February 2014, the judge in the lawsuit filed on behalf of the three jailed Chinese writers dismissed the case ruling that the court lacked jurisdiction. He also found Cisco was not at fault for abuses carried out using the censorship network.

In September 2014, a US federal court dismissed the lawsuit against Cisco over allegations of abetting torture of Falun Gong practitioners in China ruling that the allegations did not have sufficient US ties for a US court to hear the claims under the Alien Tort Claims Act.

In January 2016, NGOs filed an amicus brief that urges a US court of appeals to reinstate the Falun Gong practitioners lawsuit against Cisco.  In April 2017, the plaintiffs in this case asked the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to revive the allegations.

In July 2023, the US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit reversed the 2014 decision to dismiss the case concerning the Falun Gong practitioners and ruled that the case can move forward to trial. The Court rejected Cisco's argument that domestic corporations cannot be sued under the Alien Tort Statute, a law allowing non-U.S. citizens to bring tort claims that violate international law in US courts. To bring similar cases in the future, plaintiffs must demonstrate that a domestic company engaged in substantial conduct in the US with the knowledge it was enabling human rights violations abroad.

In September 2024, the US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit reaffirmed its 2023 decision that US tech companies, like Cisco, can face aiding and abetting liability in the US for providing surveillance tools used to commit human rights abuses. Cisco attempted to challenge the 2023 decision through an en banc review, but the court rejected this, allowing the case to move forward. Cisco has indicated plans to seek a US Supreme Court review.


Timeline