A federal jury in San Francisco has convicted former Google software engineer Linwei Ding, 38, of stealing artificial intelligence (AI) trade secrets to benefit China. The verdict, delivered on Thursday, includes seven counts of economic espionage and seven counts of theft of trade secrets following an 11-day trial in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. This marks the first conviction on AI-related economic espionage charges in the U.S., according to the Department of Justice (DOJ).
Core Facts and Immediate Action
Ding, who worked at Google, was found guilty of stealing over 2,000 pages of confidential information related to Google’s AI technology. Prosecutors allege he uploaded the stolen data to his personal Google Cloud account between May 2022 and April 2023. At the same time, Ding was secretly affiliated with two Beijing-based technology companies and applied for a Chinese government-sponsored “talent plan” aimed at attracting individuals to contribute to China’s technological growth.
Deeper Dive and Context
Legal and Procedural Details
The case began with an initial indictment in March 2024, which was later expanded in February. Each economic espionage charge carries a maximum 15-year prison term and a $5 million fine, while each trade secret theft charge carries a maximum 10-year term and a $250,000 fine. Ding is scheduled to appear at a status conference on February 3, 2025.
Government and Corporate Responses
The FBI’s Counterintelligence and Espionage Division emphasized the significance of the case, stating that Ding’s actions undermined U.S. technological leadership. Roman Rozhavsky, assistant director of the division, noted that the verdict sends a clear message about protecting valuable technologies. Google has not publicly commented on the case, but industry experts have highlighted the growing competition between the U.S. and China in AI development.
Broader Implications
The conviction underscores the U.S. government’s focus on safeguarding AI technology amid an escalating global race for dominance in the field. Prosecutors have linked Ding’s case to broader concerns about China’s recruitment efforts targeting foreign experts. The verdict may influence future legal actions against similar cases involving trade secret theft and economic espionage.
Opposing Perspectives
Ding’s legal team has not responded to requests for comment, leaving his defense strategy and potential appeals unclear. The case has also raised questions about the ethical and legal boundaries of international collaboration in technology development, particularly between the U.S. and China.