There appears to be some kind of smear campaign waged against Samsung by its foundry competitor TSMC at national level. Not sure about this insecurity or fake rivalry by Taiwanese tech companies who see Samsung as a major threat (https://phys.org/news/2013-04-taiwan-tech-industry-samsung.h...), but according to Reuters:
Samsung invested heavily in both companies XTAL and ASML (and owned at least 5% of the company at one point). Further, Samsung was never in semi-equipment/chemical business -- that's simply not their core competence.
I don't think it's a smear campaign per say, Samsung stole their their way to display tech dominance. It's just recognition that these tactics are still being embraced in lagging industries in some countries. ASML has no-touch policy for Samsung employees for their scanners, they've been pretty savvy in mitigating attempts at copying their tech for the last 20 years.
Also I didn't mean to implicate Samsung was behind the attacks, merely they benefited most from stolen trade secrets - XTAL directly compete against ASML in Korean using the secret. The same way Huawei and BOE will benefit from flexible screen tech stolen by Samsung subcontractor Toptek. So far these have been economically motivated - thieves not spies.
I think state level espionage is going to happen soon, now that ASML has been pressured to pick sides.
Samsung is a 30% shareholder of Xtal. Xtal became an immediate ASML competitor for Samsung semiconductor using the theft as implied by "our biggest Korean customer" quoted from ASML CEO in interviews. Stating Samsung is the immediate beneficiary of the theft as conjectured (AKA "hinted") by Dutch media based on ASML CEO interview at the time... is not neutral how? Lot's of IP shenanigan in high barrier semiconductor industry and Korean Chaebol industrial policy has history of IP theft to benefit domestic industries. Please explain how any of my claims triggered you so much:
>Don't forget to wipe your history so as to make it difficult to guess your national origin (though I didn't have to), because it's so easy to see your ulterior motive through the garbage -- it destroys your credibility.
Samsung's 30% share amounts to less than $8M versus Samsung's share in ASML which amounted to about $500+M and $277M in additional funding, or $777+M in total. XTAL had fewer than a dozen employees. I think it's fairly clear where Samsung's "economic interest lies in this case, but Samsung is also known for diversifying their suppliers. The company bought display panels from their competitors Sharp, LGD and even BOE who had been "hinted" as having stolen their flexible displays.
As for the CEO's comment, I also posted a link to ASML's official statement denying Samsung's role after the CEO made that statement. And yet you claim that you "didn't mean implicate" the company?
> Korean Chaebol industrial policy has history of IP theft to benefit domestic industries
can you cite sources for Korean Chaebol's "industrial policy"? Or are you still bitter about Samsung implicating Taiwanese display companies, like AUOptics in price-fixing cases, which resulted in $500M fines years back?
>Like what is this even?
Sure, read my earlier comment about Taiwanese's collective insecurity or inferior complex which stems from their fear of Samsung (https://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/22/technology/taiwan-tries-t...). See also my comment about Samsung's reporting of price-fixing by Taiwanese companies. I've encountered into others making similar comments about this particular case and they were all predictably of Taiwanese origin.
ASML rejects Samsung's involvement in IP theft case with rival, APRIL 17, 2019, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-asml-holding-spying-samsu...
Samsung invested heavily in both companies XTAL and ASML (and owned at least 5% of the company at one point). Further, Samsung was never in semi-equipment/chemical business -- that's simply not their core competence.