it's even more bizarre: Wu controls Arm China because he's physically in control of a seal that gives him power to sign documents with the company authority[0].
Most commonly know example is "bearer bonds", which are often used in heist movies and similar films, including, in the original script, in Ferris Bueller's Day Off[1].
Couldn't Arm publicly ignore that seal of authority? Kind of like when a certificate expires and you revoke it?
I don't understand how the guy controls anything. Even if say he has all the designs copied in China, Arm Global could just declare those are stolen designs and anyone that uses it without paying the global company directly would be in violation of that and could be sued (in other countries, if not China).
I think the only reason this comical and absurd situation continues is only because - like many tech companies before it - Arm continues to hope for bread crumbs in the "huge Chinese market" and accept being at the mercy of the CCP, even though this has proven to be a disastrous strategy for most other companies that thought like this. In the end, the government just gives your tech to the local companies, that end up dominating there, and maybe even globally later on, with your tech.
>Couldn't Arm publicly ignore that seal of authority? Kind of like when a certificate expires and you revoke it?
They did. And in other for a new Seal to be approved, it required something else ( I cant remember what it was ) which was also in the hand of the CEO. So in China under their law ARM China is perfectly fine and there is nothing they can / would do. ( Not that they are trying to help ) ARM UK and US can't do much apart from not supplying future design to ARM China.
I should note all of these was before UK and China's tension got worse.
[0] https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-07-01/main-s... look for "Who controls a company?"