[manuelabeledo]

> It is a distinction without a difference. I buy on Amazon, I pay on Amazon. They have a complicated supply chain with third party sellers, but it doesn't make them immune from import bans.

Amazon third party sellers work like Ebay.

You are suggesting that when you buy something off Ebay, it is Ebay the one selling you the stuff, which is clearly not true.

You could find things on Amazon that aren't licensed to be sold in the US. That doesn't make them suddenly "legal".

> Yes, that is true, but yet to see any citation of an ban on imports, sale, or use.

If they cannot get a FCC license, they cannot legally distribute or sell their phones in US soil. That's just FCC rules [0]

But I'm honestly not sure what you are trying to prove here.

For example, I recently bought a Japanese Sony gadget on Ebay. It has Bluetooth. It definitely does not have a FCC sticker, nor has been licensed by the FCC. I was able to buy it, but Sony is not allowed to sell it in the US.

Does the fact that I bought it from an US website, mean that Sony is effectively selling this gadget in the US? Of course not, that's ridiculous.

[0] https://www.fcc.gov/enforcement/areas/equipment-authorizatio....

[aliyfarah]

I’m getting second hand embarrassment watching you try win an argument you lost decisively 3 replies ago.

Your comment: “Huawei hardware cannot be legally distributed or sold by US companies.”

You were dead wrong. Just admit it, it’s not personal.

“Does the fact that I bought it from an US website, mean that Sony is effectively selling this gadget in the US? Of course not, that's ridiculous.”

You can’t be this naive. This is 2023 not 2001. Sanctioned companies selling through distributors has been around since sanctions. US laws have explicit rules around this and companies facilitating are themselves subject to sanctions.

[manuelabeledo]

> Sanctioned companies selling through distributors has been around since sanctions.

Right. So you can illegally buy and sell stuff in the US. What a surprise.

> Your comment: “Huawei hardware cannot be legally distributed or sold by US companies.”

Yes, that was indeed my comment.

Because the FCC will not issue new licenses to Huawei, and Huawei cannot sell their hardware in the US without such licenses.

[sorwin]

Huh?

This FCC document clearly states exactly what it's banning:

https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-389524A1.pdf

https://www.fcc.gov/supplychain/coveredlist

"Telecommunications equipment produced by Huawei Technologies Company, including telecommunications or video surveillance services provided by such entity or using such equipment."

Phones are a part of telecommunications equipment.

[WillPostForFood]

The definition of telecommunications equipment is:

The term “telecommunications equipment” means equipment used by a carrier to provide telecommunications services, and includes software integral to such equipment (including upgrades).

I don't think that includes phones. That is routing/switching hardware and software. I.e., infrastructure equipment, not consumer devices.

[manuelabeledo]

The definition applies to terminals. The FCC routinely uses the term to refer to terminals, e.g. [0]

Also, in the same paragraph, you can read that they explicitly mention “video surveillance services” as telecommunications equipment, which are terminals as well.

[0] https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-90-133A1.pdf