Officially misrepresenting that state of affairs to the government with so much on the line is what's illegal, not "sending an email to someone in China."
There is no ban on collaborating with Chinese universities in the US. There are restrictions for some type of research (that actually extend to the other countries as well).
It's the "Martha Stewart" lesson. It may be that you have done nothing wrong. The government may stop by and ask you questions anyways. If you lie during those questions you have committed a felony.
Do NOT speak without a lawyer. In particular if you have anything worth losing. Which is more or less everyone.
> At issue in the new ruling, issued 11 July, is whether Tao’s lack of disclosure about his affiliation with Fuzhou University in China affected federal agency funding decisions. The Denver appeals court agreed 2-1 that it was irrelevant because Tao had no grant proposals pending before those two agencies in question – the US Department of Energy and National Science Foundation – at the time he made his affiliation statement.
[1] https://cen.acs.org/research-integrity/misconduct/Court-over...
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECHELON [2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Snowden
Why is it ok for one country to do this, but somehow outrageous that another country does it (and likely on a much less sophisticated scale)
Your evidence for some grand scheme of technology theft doesn't seem to be well supported or justify racial profiling.
regarding the 3rd link
"The theft and piracy perpetuated by Xiang Li, 36, of Chengdu, China, included industrial-grade software and confidential data stolen from the internal server of a cleared defense contractor"
Not by Xiang Li himself, it's worth noting. So this particular example at least hardly supports the general conclusion you seem to be implying.
> [Wronald Best]’s trafficking in cracked software involved not only stolen property but also stolen ideas. ... On the supply side of the equation, he was the one releasing MPD’s software into the “wilds” of the Internet by providing it to Russian Cracker, and assisting Xiang Li by providing detailed installation instructions. On the demand side of the equation, as a consumer, Best used stolen, cracked software to design and manufacture products for the military and law enforcement, without payment to the companies that created the software in the first place. (https://www.google.com/books/edition/CRACK99_The_Takedown_of...)
Yes he operated a site that hosted cracked software. How does this support your narrative he was a spy or that it was espionage instead of for personal financial gain?
Let’s have a read of the first paragraph
>The individual operated a website used to distribute more than $100 million worth of pirated software around the world, making it one of the most significant cases of copyright infringement ever uncovered – and dismantled
Why don’t you quote this paragraph of your source?
>The investigation revealed that Li used the Crack 99 website to distribute pirated or cracked software to customers all over the world, including the United States
It’s a hard sell spinning this into espionage.
Industrial spying for an adversary is o.g. espionage.
[1] https://www.justice.gov/usao-de/pr/chief-scientist-governmen...
[2] https://www.justice.gov/archive/usao/de/news/2012/Li%20Press...
This was started under Trump, and canned under Biden. It’s a travesty and complete circus of an injustice and a racially motivated assault on the scientific community.
I don't even understand how any of this is illegal? You can be thrown in prison and have your reputation and career ruined by the government for sending an email to someone in China now?