Partnering to Improve Market Data in Brazil

From the USDA:

Posted by Terry Long, Agricultural Marketing Service Fruit and Vegetable Program Market News Director, on November 26, 2014 at 10:00 AM

The MIOA members also toured the local wholesale market, Centrais de Abastecimento do Distrito Federal S.A (CEASA-DF), in Brasilia, Brazil. Dr. Luis Palmer, Chief of the International Reports Section of AMS Fruit and Vegetable Programs Market News (second from right with blue shirt) tours the market with MIOA members. Photo Courtesy of Francisco Stuckert, CONAB.

Quality data is paramount when it comes to helping markets reach their full potential. This is especially true in the agriculture industry where businesses are always searching for reliable data that can help them make important decisions like what to produce or how much to buy. I recently joined a team of USDA employees from my agency — the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) — and the Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) that traveled to Brazil to share how we collect and disseminate key market data to help buyers and sellers make informed decisions.

Our trip to Brazil presented several opportunities to increase transparency in the inter-connected global marketplace. The primary purpose of the trip to Brasilia was to participate in the Regular Meeting of the Market Information for the Organization of the Americas (MIOA), which brings together a network of 33 member countries to collect, process, analyze, and disseminate information relative to markets and agricultural commodities.

We were invited to hold a presentation about our market collection techniques for senior Brazilian government officials and lead technical specialists. For 100 years, AMS Market News has collected and disseminated price, volume, and other critical data for businesses across the globe. As an independent, third-party organization with employees stationed at wholesale markets, auctions, and similar locations, we can quickly gather and send out reports that accurately capture the pulse of various commodity markets.

The primary purpose of the trip to Brasilia was to participate in the Regular Meeting of the Market Information for the Organization of the Americas (MIOA), which brings together a network of 33 member countries to collect, process, analyze, and disseminate information relative to markets and agricultural commodities. Photo Courtesy of Francisco Stuckert, CONAB.

Recognizing the value of our system and how a similar system could benefit Brazilian producers, handlers, and marketers, they asked us to share our methodology and practices for accurately collecting and distributing timely and reliable information. We were honored to meet with the Minister of Agriculture, Livestock and Food Supply (MAPA), Neri Geller, to discuss the opportunity of a formal cooperative agreement between the two countries. After a successful meeting, the next step will be a letter from Minister Geller to Secretary Vilsack formalizing the arrangement.  For AMS Market News, the first step would be to assess the country’s market reporting capabilities and practices and then make recommendations.

The second largest country in the MIOA and the sixth largest in the world, Brazil is a critical trading partner. While it’s a major competitor with the U.S., it is still the 17^th most popular destination for U.S. agricultural exports. Increasing the country’s market transparency can improve trade between the countries in areas such as beef. It can also help Brazil feed its population of more than 200 million people.

Increasing Brazil’s market transparency will also improve the MIOA’s overall standing. Already the strongest economy in South America, other countries in the region can benefit from an improved agricultural sector that can expand its exports of key commodities like coffee, soybeans, and beef thanks to more accurate market data. This type of work has improved the MIOA in the past. Similar agreements made with Mexico and India helped these countries strengthen their agricultural market information systems to the benefit of domestic and international interests.

Both countries left the meeting feeling optimistic about the future. In 2013, the U.S. exported a record $1.6 billion of food and farm exports to Brazil in 2013. This figure stands to improve as both countries benefit from improved market data. AMS and the rest of us here at USDA are committed to finding ways to facilitate marketing opportunities for U.S. agricultural businesses. We will continue to participate in domestic and international groups to realize these opportunities.

Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) Fruit and Vegetable Program Market News Director Terry Long is interviewed by a member of the local press. AMS was invited to do a presentation about its market collection techniques for senior Brazilian government officials and lead technical specialists. Photo Courtesy of Francisco Stuckert, CONAB.

Toyota Exporting *Made in the USA* Vehicles

CNBC's Phil LeBeau and Jim Lentz, Toyota North America CEO, discuss the automaker's plan to export Corollas built in Mississippi to Latin America and the Caribbean.

Video (8:06)

http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?play=1&video=3000201315

U.S. Files Trade Case Against China Over Cars

The following is an excerpt from an article in:


The New York Times
Tuesday, September 18, 2012

News Analysis: U.S. Files Trade Case Against China Over Cars

By KEITH BRADSHER BEIJING — President Obama’s trade case against China on cars and auto parts will have little immediate impact on jobs and companies in the United States, but it is one of the few legal options available to the United States as China’s auto industry faces overcapacity problems and looks overseas to increase sales.

In filing the case on Monday with the World Trade Organization, Mr. Obama is making a political gesture to Midwestern states coping with the pressure that Chinese exports are placing on the American auto industry. But actual effects are likely to be delayed and limited.

World Trade Organization cases typically take a year and a half to resolve. And unlike antidumping and antisubsidy cases, which can result in steep tariffs on imports that stay in place for years, the trade organization cases often end with the losing country simply abandoning the offending policy.

There can be a requirement that companies repay previous subsidies, but that is often difficult to enforce and can require further years of legal wrangling.

The subsidies at issue are also small relative to the scale of Chinese exports, which may mean that China’s low wages, high investment rate and other advantages may have played a bigger role in the spectacular expansion of Chinese auto exports than government subsidies.

American trade officials respond that while China may have many strengths underlying its export prowess, they are doing what they can to address those policies that may violate international trade rules — particularly China’s emerging policy of setting up so-called export bases in which automakers receive incentives to make cars and car parts for overseas markets.

For more, visit www.nytimes.com.

With Russia Joining W.T.O., U.S. Companies Worry About Losing Business

The following is an excerpt from an article in 

The New York Times
Wednesday, August 22, 2012

With Russia Joining W.T.O., U.S. Companies Worry About Losing Business

By ANDREW E. KRAMER

MOSCOW — After two decades of negotiations, Russia will finally join the World Trade Organization on Wednesday. The lower trade barriers that come along with membership will open up new opportunities for foreign companies to do business in Russia.

But American companies are guaranteed no such advantages — and may even face higher Russian tariffs than their competitors from other countries.

Because of broader policy concerns about the Kremlin’s crackdown on dissidents and its support for rogue governments, Congress has balked at the Obama administration’s request to grant Russia permanent normal trade relation status. That status is important since the W.T.O. requires that any country that seeks to benefit from it must apply the same trade rules to all member countries.

Major American exporters to Russia, like Caterpillar, Deere and General Electric, are worried about the potential impact on their business from the Congressional inaction. Across all sectors of the economy, Russia will lower import tariffs to 7 percent, from about 15 percent today, for the 155 countries in the trade organization. Although Russian officials say they do not have any immediate intention of applying discriminatory tariffs against American companies, they could legally do so at any time.

Russia was the last major economy that was not part of the trade group, and joining is expected to be a boon for Russian consumers and businesses. Exporting companies in Europe, Asia and the United States eagerly await open access to a population of 142 million people with growing incomes and an expanding middle class.

The World Bank estimates that W.T.O. membership will add three percentage points to Russia’s gross domestic product once the new tariffs are phased in.

Russia negotiated for membership for 18 years, beginning when the W.T.O. was called the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. That is longer than any major W.T.O. entrant, including China, for which permanent trade status was also a battle in Congress. Presidents Clinton, Bush and Obama all supported Russia’s inclusion, and the country won accession last year, with formal membership coming this week.

For more, visit www.nytimes.com.

India’s Industry Helps Open Door to World

The New York Times

Sunday, April 01, 2012

India’s Industry Helps Open Door to World

By JIM YARDLEY

LAHORE, Pakistan — On the day the Indian trade delegation came across the border, Pakistan was having another political crisis. The prime minister was embroiled in a showdown with the country’s Supreme Court. Early elections were rumored. And Islamists had just staged a rally in Karachi to protest “foreign intervention” on Pakistani soil.

Not, perhaps, the perfect moment to hammer out closer trade ties.

Yet Rajiv Kumar, a leader of the Indian delegation, was pleased. It was mid-February, and his business group was staging the first Indian trade show ever held in Pakistan. Tens of thousands of visitors would attend during three days. And Indian and Pakistani business leaders, as well as both countries’ commerce ministers, swapped cards, sipped tea and feasted at lavish banquets. “Look at this!” Mr. Kumar exclaimed as his car rolled up to the convention center here in Lahore, where crowds were thronging for the trade show. “My God! Quite good, I’d say.”

One truism about the tortured relationship between India and Pakistan is that there is never a perfect moment. For six decades, through three wars and one nuclear standoff, diplomats have tried, and failed, to improve relations. Now, the private sector is giving it a shot. Trade has become the most promising opening in the latest round of diplomacy, as progress remains largely stalled on tough issues like terrorism, water rights and the status of Kashmir.

The foray into Pakistan is further proof of the increasingly important role of India’s private sector in foreign policy. India’s leaders, eager for a bigger footprint in global affairs, now aspire to a permanent seat on an expanded United Nations Security Council. But the Indian Foreign Service, though consisting of top-notch officers, is too understaffed to provide a comprehensive global presence.

To compensate, the government often relies on the private sector to serve as an intermediary abroad. India’s two leading business groups — C.I.I. (the Confederation of Indian Industry) and Ficci (the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry) — now have offices around the world and sponsor informal diplomatic dialogues between India and countries like Japan, China, Singapore and the United States.

Government and advertisers have different ideas about 'Do Not Track' - The Hill's Hillicon Valley

The Obama administration and the technology industry have touted the creation of a "Do Not Track" button to help consumers protect their privacy online, but the government and advertisers are not on the same page about what the button will do.

The Federal Trade Commission first proposed a Do Not Track button in 2010. The concept is modeled on the agency's popular "Do Not Call" list, which allows consumers to opt out of receiving telemarketing calls.

FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz urged Web companies to voluntarily set up a system for users to opt out of online tracking and warned that legislation could be necessary if they failed to act.

Last month, all of the major Web browsers promised to create a Do Not Track feature, and the Digital Advertising Alliance, a coalition of advertising trade groups, said that by the end of the year, they would stop displaying targeted ads to users who had selected the feature in their browsers.

The commitment was announced as part of the White House's unveiling of its "Privacy Bill of Rights" – a set of principles about how companies should handle users' personal data.

Leibowitz praised the companies for "stepping up" to his challenge and said the feature would ensure "consumers have greater choice and control over how they are tracked online."

But Mike Zaneis, general counsel of the Interactive Advertising Bureau, a member of the Digital Advertising Alliance, said the name "Do Not Track" is a "complete misnomer."

For more, click the link below:

Government and advertisers have different ideas about 'Do Not Track' - The Hill's Hillicon Valley

F.T.C. Seeks Privacy Legislation

Excerpt from an article in

The New York Times

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

F.T.C. Seeks Privacy Legislation

By TANZINA VEGA and EDWARD WYATT

The government’s chief consumer protection agency said on Monday that it intended to take direct aim at the vast industry that has grown up around the buying and selling of information about American consumers.

The agency, the Federal Trade Commission, called on Congress to enact legislation regulating so-called data brokers, which compile and trade a wide range of personal and financial data about millions of consumers from online and offline sources. The legislation would give consumers access to information collected about them and allow them to correct and update such data.

The agency also sent a cautionary signal to technology and advertising companies regarding a “Do Not Track” mechanism that allows consumers to opt out of having their online behavior monitored and shared. It warned that if companies did not voluntarily provide a satisfactory Do Not Track option, it would support additional laws that mandate it.

The recommendations, part of a sweeping set of guidelines in an F.T.C. report on Monday, represent the government’s latest move to address the issue of consumer privacy.

On one side of the debate are data brokers like Experian and Acxiom, which collect and sell information, and the huge ecosystem of technology and online advertising companies — including Google, Microsoft and Facebook — that target consumers based on their personal preferences.

On the other side are consumer groups and privacy advocates that are concerned about the volume of data being collected and how little control consumers have over that information.

The government’s Do Not Track efforts are likely to collide with the desire of companies to continue the lucrative business of collecting, using and sharing information about the people who use their services. Although these businesses say they support limits on using this information, they generally still want to be able to collect it.

CA Technologies Wins Copyright Infringement & Trade Secret Action

CA Technologies Wins Copyright Infringement and Trade Secret Action Against Australia-based Independent Systems Integrators

Federal Court of Australia Judge Expected to Issue Orders to Implement Decision

ISLANDIA, NY, and SYDNEY, AUSTRALIA, March 21, 2012 – CA Technologies (NASDAQ: CA) today announced that the Federal Court of Australia has found Independent Systems Integrators (ISI) of Sydney, Australia violated copyright laws and breached its duty of confidentiality in developing and selling a product using intellectual property (IP) from CA Technologies CA Datacom relational database management system.

“We are pleased with the Court’s decision,” said Amy Fliegelman Olli, CA Technologies executive vice president and general counsel.  “CA Technologies will continue to vigorously protect its intellectual property and aggressively pursue any illegal use in order to protect the substantial investments we make in research and development.  Furthermore, we are committed to safeguarding the considerable investments and confidence our customers place in us when they purchase our products, solutions and services.”
    
In the next phase of the decision process, the Federal Court of Australia is expected to issue orders necessary to implement its ruling. 

The Federal Court found that ISI infringed CA Technologies copyrights by using CA Datacom code to develop and implement its 2BDB2 product.  In addition, the Court further ruled that ISI violated its duty of confidentiality by using confidential information found in the Administrator and Programmer Guides provided to CA Datacom customers to develop the ISI 2BDB2 product.

The ISI case is the second major instance in the past three years where CA Technologies has successfully taken actions to protect its intellectual property. 

In February 2009, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, CA Technologies reached a settlement with Rocket Software, Inc. resolving the company’s claims of copyright infringement and trade secret misappropriation.  As part of the settlement, Rocket has agreed to license technology from CA Technologies, including source code authored several years ago and related trade secrets that were the subject of the litigation. Further terms of the settlement were not disclosed.

W.T.O. and Barriers to Financial Change

Excerpt from an article in

The New York Times

Sunday, March 18, 2012

W.T.O. and Barriers to Financial Change

By GRETCHEN MORGENSON

EVEN now, after all we’ve been through, something is still wrong with Wall Street.

That’s the takeaway from the extraordinary — and extraordinarily public — resignation of Greg Smith from Goldman Sachs last week. His criticism of Goldman, made in an Op-Ed article in The New York Times, suggested that some of the business practices and inherent conflicts in the financial industry are as troubling today as they were before all of those taxpayer bailouts.

Goldman disagreed with him, of course. But Mr. Smith’s Op-Ed article — and the resounding response to it — provide yet another reminder of why it is crucial that we remake our financial markets so that they are safe for investors and taxpayers.

And yet, the snail’s-pace progress of this effort is worrisome. Financial institutions, eager to maintain their profitable status quo, have lobbied hard against change. As a result, too-big-to-fail institutions have become even bigger and more powerful.  

In addition to lobbying, big financial players have another potential weapon in their battle against safety and soundness. This one is more hidden from view and comes from, of all places, the World Trade Organization in Geneva.

Back in the 1990s, when many in Washington — and virtually everyone on Wall Street — embraced the deregulation that helped lead to the recent crisis, a vast majority of W.T.O. nations made varying commitments to what’s called the financial services agreement, which loosens rules governing banks and other such institutions.

Many countries, for instance, said they would not restrict the number of financial services companies in their territories. Many also pledged not to cap the total value of assets or transactions conducted by such companies. These pledges also appear to raise trouble for any country that tries to ban risky financial instruments.

According to the W.T.O., 125 of its 153 member countries have made varying degrees of commitments to the financial services agreement. Now, these pledges could easily be used to undermine new rules intended to make financial systems safer.

News Release from Boeing - WTO Decision

Boeing Statement Regarding the WTO Appellate Decision in DS 353

CHICAGO, March 12, 2012 /PRNewswire/ -- The World Trade Organization (WTO) Appellate Body today released its decision in DS 353 addressing a complaint the European Union (EU) filed against the United States in retaliation for an earlier U.S. challenge to the subsidies European governments have provided to Airbus. Boeing (NYSE: BA) issued the following statement in response to the WTO action:

"The Appellate Body today slashed earlier findings of harm to Airbus from U.S. subsidies.  The decision confirms that in terms of amount, effect and nature, U.S. government support to Boeing is minimal in comparison to the massive European subsidies provided Airbus.   

• "With respect to amount, the Appellate Body found that unaddressed subsidies to Boeing total approximately $3 billion – about one-sixth of the $18 billion Europe has given to Airbus.
• "With respect to effects, the Appellate Body rejected 66% of the EU's claims that Airbus had lost sales as a result of U.S. subsidies and more than 93% of its claims that it had lost market share.  Boeing has had to compete with an entire fleet of subsidized Airbus aircraft that the WTO found would most likely not even exist without illegal launch aid, while Airbus competes against a Boeing product line that received little support from the U.S. government according to today's ruling. 
• "With respect to nature, the WTO found that launch aid was a pernicious, market-distorting subsidy without which Airbus itself would most likely not have existed and no Airbus aircraft would have been built at all.  By contrast, the WTO has now found that Boeing has received little U.S. government support during the same time period since the formation of Airbus.

"In sum, the WTO decisions in the two cases establish conclusively and finally that European subsidies competitively disadvantage Boeing and American workers and will continue to do so until launch aid is eliminated.  

"We appreciate the work of the WTO Appellate Body, and we are prepared to work with the U.S. government as it determines what steps, if any, are necessary to address the WTO's decision.  Boeing is fully committed to compliance with WTO rules. 

"Airbus has not shown the same commitment to compliance with the WTO's decisions and rules. The EU had until Dec. 1, 2011, to comply with the ruling against the illegal Airbus subsidies, and it refused to comply.  Airbus continues to benefit from billions of dollars of government loans that do not carry commercial terms and that the WTO found to be illegal market-distorting subsidies. What's more, European governments have recently provided billions of dollars in new launch aid for the next Airbus model, the A350, continuing this illegal practice in defiance of the WTO.    

"The U.S. government has made it clear that it will use all of the WTO tools at its disposal to ensure that European governments comply with last year's ruling – particularly the ruling against $15 billion in illegal launch aid, the pernicious subsidy unique to Airbus. Boeing supports and appreciates the strong stance the U.S. Trade Representative has taken to force European compliance and finally insist upon the level playing-field necessary for fair and open global competition."

News Release from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce

Release Date: Feb 21, 2012Contact: 888-249-NEWS

---

U.S. Chamber Applauds Announcement of U.S.-Korea Trade Agreement Implementation

WASHINGTON D.C.—The U.S. Chamber of Commerce applauded the administration and the U.S. Trade Representative today for their announcement that the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS) will enter into force on March 15, 2012.  The landmark trade agreement that would support more than 70,000 export-related jobs was ratified last October through a bipartisan vote in Congress.

“The U.S. business community commends our negotiators for staying the course on implementing a groundbreaking trade deal with South Korea that will create American jobs and boost American competitiveness,” said Thomas J. Donohue, president and CEO of the U.S. Chamber. “We will now be able to play on a level playing field in South Korea’s dynamic market and start creating tens of thousands of new jobs here at home.”

Upon entry into force, tariffs will be eliminated on nearly 80% of U.S. exports of industrial products and nearly two-thirds of U.S. exports of agricultural products to South Korea.  It will also break down non-tariff barriers and strengthen transparency and intellectual property protections in South Korea so that American companies can compete fairly in the South Korean market.

“It is now up to the business community, including the hundreds of thousands of small and medium sized enterprises that make up the backbone of the U.S. economy, to take full advantage of this agreement to grow American exports,” Donohue said. “This agreement is the foundation for moving bipartisan, job-creating policies forward, and we urge the administration to build on the positive momentum of the South Korea trade agreement to continue opening up markets abroad.”

The Chamber is continuing to advocate for implementation of the trade agreements with Colombia and Panama on a commercially sound basis as soon as possible.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is the world’s largest business federation representing the interests of more than 3 million businesses of all sizes, sectors, and regions, as well as state and local chambers and industry associations.

Supplier of the Year

News release from GE:

21 February 2012

GE Energy’s Industrial Solutions Business Named Gexpro’s 2011 North America Supplier of the Year

 

PLAINVILLE, Conn. — Feb. 21, 2012 — GE Energy’s (NYSE: GE) Industrial Solutions business has received the prestigious 2011 North America Supplier of the Year award from Gexpro, a part of Rexel Holdings, U.S.A. The award, one of four presented, was announced recently at the Gexpro Leadership Conference in Phoenix, Ariz.

“GE Energy’s Industrial Solutions business was clearly focused on innovation, marketing, services and solutions with Gexpro,” said Scott King, vice president of sourcing and inventory for Gexpro. “They successfully drove engagement and leadership that netted revenue growth for all five Gexpro divisions.”

Many factors and metrics determine which Gexpro vendor receives the Supplier of the Year award. Industrial Solutions excelled in the following areas:

• Dedicated resource investments focused on Gexpro growth of Industrial Solutions products.
• More than 10 percent revenue growth versus 2010 results.
• Deeper collaboration across every Gexpro division with a strong focus on sales growth, operations improvements and trade area strategies.
• Improved field sales leadership engagement from GE regional sales leaders, sales directors and account managers across all five Gexpro divisions.
• Highly effective sales and marketing programs created specifically for Gexpro.
• Relationship builders, training resources and marketing tools: the Gexpro-dedicated GE Connections quarterly newsletter and The GE Source, a section of GE-exclusive pages within Gexpro’s quarterly intranet.
• GE’s overall tenacity for higher engagement and performance with Gexpro across all functions.

“Gexpro is a foundation distributor with GE Energy, and our mutual success depends on working together to solve challenges and deliver results for both teams as we have done for more than a century,” said Gary Arnott, North America sales executive for Industrial Solutions. “GE has resources, marketing and sales dedicated to help Gexpro be more successful and drive growth. Together, we are able to provide solutions to jointly meet our customers’ many challenges and help them save money.”

Gexpro, headquartered in Shelton, Conn., and a part of Rexel Holdings, U.S.A., serves the construction, commercial, industrial and original equipment manufacturer markets with more than 2,500 professionals in more than 150 locations around the globe. Gexpro’s Answer-Based Sourcing and Active 8 Energy Solutions bundle the electrical supplies its customers need with services and solutions to add value, improve performance and save money on every project. By combining productivity tools, large local inventories and dedicated specialists, Gexpro leads the industry in delivering on customer needs and building on competitive advantages for its customers.

And the Privacy Gaps Just Keep On Coming

Excerpt from an article in The New York Times
Monday, February 20, 2012

And the Privacy Gaps Just Keep On Coming 

By NICK BILTON

SAN FRANCISCO -- Another week. Another privacy debacle.

This time, Apple is to blame. Yes, the company that has promoted itself as more private and secure than the other guys, with its stringent app approval process, has actually been handing out people's address books as if they were sausage samples on a toothpick at the supermarket.

Next week there will be another privacy slip. And again the week after. Like the movie "Groundhog Day," where the day repeats itself. Where the day repeats itself. Where the day repeats ... you get the point.

It might be Google, Amazon, Sony, Facebook or Apple, again. Or perhaps a small Silicon Valley start-up in such a rush to get its product out in the face of competition that it will focus more on designing the icon of its app, than ensuring users' privacy.

Imagine if a bank paid more attention to the color of the carpet in its lobby than the type of safe it uses to store its customers' valuables. No one would want to store anything there, that's for sure.

During the time it took to write this column, yet another privacy violation was reported. The Wall Street Journal said Friday that Google and other advertising companies bypassed privacy settings in Apple's Safari browser in order to track people's online behavior; three legislators called on the Federal Trade Commission to investigate. Google said it immediately moved to address the concerns.

Whose fault is all of this? We can't just point fingers at the companies that make iPhones, apps, social networking services and Web sites - although there are a lot of fingers that can be aimed in their direction. We're all somewhat to blame.

Chinese Official to Hear Trade Theft Tale

Excerpt from an article in The New York Times
Wednesday, February 15, 2012

Chinese Official to Hear Trade Theft Tale 

By JONATHAN WEISMAN

WASHINGTON — China’s next leader, Xi Jinping, may never have heard of American Superconductor Corporation before he arrived here Monday, but by the end of his visit United States officials hope to make the small Massachusetts wind-energy company an object lesson in the impact of Chinese trade secret theft on American business.

Senator John Kerry, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a Massachusetts Democrat, plans to raise personally with Mr. Xi the case of a company that saw 70 percent of its business evaporate last year after a Chinese partner enticed one of its employees to steal the crown jewel of its technology.

“It’s a very clear and, in our judgment, egregious, palpable demonstration of the practice that we are deeply concerned about,” Mr. Kerry said, “but it’s not the only one. There are so many things: cyberattacks, access-to-market issues, espionage, theft. These are major points of discussion between us and China.”

Both President Obama and Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. warned Mr. Xi on Tuesday that they had been hearing more and more from United States businesses about intellectual property and trade secret theft, but they did not specifically mention American Superconductor. However, background material on the company’s experience was included in briefing papers distributed before the arrival in Washington of Mr. Xi’s delegation, and a top administration official said the Chinese were aware of United States frustration over the case.

Electronic Security & Digital Espionage

Excerpt from an article in The New York Times
Saturday, February 11, 2012

Electronic Security a Worry in an Age of Digital Espionage 

By NICOLE PERLROTH

SAN FRANCISCO — When Kenneth G. Lieberthal, a China expert at the Brookings Institution, travels to that country, he follows a routine that seems straight from a spy film.

He leaves his cellphone and laptop at home and instead brings “loaner” devices, which he erases before he leaves the United States and wipes clean the minute he returns. In China, he disables Bluetooth and Wi-Fi, never lets his phone out of his sight and, in meetings, not only turns off his phone but also removes the battery, for fear his microphone could be turned on remotely. He connects to the Internet only through an encrypted, password-protected channel, and copies and pastes his password from a USB thumb drive. He never types in a password directly, because, he said, “the Chinese are very good at installing key-logging software on your laptop.”

What might have once sounded like the behavior of a paranoid is now standard operating procedure for officials at American government agencies, research groups and companies that do business in China and Russia — like Google, the State Department and the Internet security giant McAfee. Digital espionage in these countries, security experts say, is a real and growing threat — whether in pursuit of confidential government information or corporate trade secrets.

“If a company has significant intellectual property that the Chinese and Russians are interested in, and you go over there with mobile devices, your devices will get penetrated,” said Joel F. Brenner, formerly the top counterintelligence official in the office of the director of national intelligence. Theft of trade secrets was long the work of insiders — corporate moles or disgruntled employees. But it has become easier to steal information remotely because of the Internet, the proliferation of smartphones and the inclination of employees to plug their personal devices into workplace networks and cart proprietary information around. Hackers’ preferred modus operandi, security experts say, is to break into employees’ portable devices and leapfrog into employers’ networks — stealing secrets while leaving nary a trace.