向右滑动:上一篇 向左滑动:下一篇 我知道了
广告

仿冒芯片:背黑锅政府来,送死供货商去?

仿冒电子组件流入让美国国会感到震惊与担忧,同时也对责任归属作出严厉惩罚的相关规定:即使是在不知情的情况下让仿冒组件流入国防供应链的供货商,也可能遭到起诉。

芯片仿冒者无法真的取得成功,以后也不可能。虽然电子产业中充斥着有关仿冒组件流入航空、消费电子产品以及军事设备等领域造成冲击的新闻与研究报导,但事实上这些报导都只反映出这些事件的单方面而已。因为,就在芯片仿冒者逐渐增加各种伪造组件供应,并破坏电子产业供应链之际,业界制造商以及政府监管人员也正扩大清查以及打击这些犯罪行为的力度。 组件制造商、经销商、电子制造服务(EMS)供货商和原始设备制造商(OEM)虽然没办法彻底扫荡已流入供应链中的仿冒组件;但是,根据我在过去几周来所取得的消息来源,业界厂商们正秘密且密集地发展各种计划,打算发动一场反仿冒的激烈行动。 部份的努力成果是由于美国国会与美国政府的决定,他们希望制造商们能负责确保提供给国防部的组件品质与真伪,但多家业界公司也站出来开始要求一致的行动计划,共同打击仿冒以及减少仿冒产品,特别是每当一有相关事件被报导出来,整个业界市场都会遭到无情的攻击。 在2012年美国政府发布的《国防授权法》(NDAA)中,反仿冒条款确实对于电子产业带来了压力。日前于伦敦举行ES-LIVE大会(连接组件制造商和买家的年度会议)一场有关组件仿冒问题的研讨会上,主持人Bob Willis提醒与会者必须更加重视现有的采购策略,特别是如果出售电子组件给国防部的话,如果不特别小心谨慎,“最后很可能会被套上橘色的犯人服装,然后啷当入狱,”他警告道。 Bob Willis的这一席话绝非夸大其辞。Bob Willis不但是业界的一位机械工程师,同时也是负责检测仿冒组件的专家与顾问。他指出,NDAA认为,证明卖给国防部的组件真实性是制造商和供货商的 责任,因此,如果他们没法确保组件的真伪,可能就会像新闻报导所强调的一样,沦落到被起诉和监禁的后果。 对于仿冒电子组件流入美国政府的事件报导持续增加,这让美国国会感到震惊与担忧,同时也对责任归属作出严厉惩罚的相关规定,以打击犯罪。IHS公司在最近的一份报告中指出, 即使是在不知情的情况下让仿冒组件流入国防供应链的供货商也可能遭到起诉。根据IHS对于NDAA所作的解释,以下是国防承包商必须担负的相关责任: ‧承包商必须负责检查并避免使用或含有仿冒电子组件或疑似仿冒组件。承包商也负责任何必要的补救或纠正措施,以解决使用或内含这一类仿冒组件的问题。国防部的合约将不再提供仿冒电子组件与疑似仿冒电子组件的成本,或任何为解决使用这些组件的补救与纠正措施所需承担的成本。承包商必须建立严格的品质审核程序与流程,以使用经由授权供货商取得的可信任组件供应以及电子组件采购。 如果这么沉重的负担被转移到供货商与国防承包商身上,为什么我仍坚信仿冒者没机会成功呢?答案很简单。经过这些年来,在整个供应链各层面的许多公司已经开始不断地提前在仿冒者动作之前更快展开打击行动。此外,目前也有越来越多的公司们愿意出面解决这个问题,甚至坦承在其库存中发现仿冒组件。这与两年前的情况 已不可同日而语了,还记得当时连只是在同样一句话中同时提到仿冒组件以及一家有信誉的经销商或制造商名称时,都是一大禁忌。 如今,许多公司不仅坦承在其车存中发现仿冒组件,同时也大方透露这些组件可能经由什么管道渗透到供应链中。事实上,包括IHS公司等研究人员现在能够找到更多相关资料的原因就来自于制造商,包括OEM、EMS与组件供货商等,他们更愿意提供这些信息与协助了。 最后,制造商们正为其员工、供货商与客户们举办相关的培训与其它教育研会,让他们能够具备打击、检查与回报仿冒组件与仿冒行为的相关知识与工具。除了这些活动以外,由于仿冒组件事件频传,不但为整个产业带来了共同打击仿冒组件的合作行动,也催生了相关的技术创新。 编译:Susan Hong 本文授权编译自EBN Online,版权所有,谢绝转载 本文下一页:

相关阅读:
iSuppli:2011年仿冒元器件创记录,平均15秒产1个
美军装备中充斥中国假冒电子零部件
iSuppli:警惕越来越多的仿冒芯片进入你的供应链pHHesmc

{pagination} Counterfeiters Aren't Winning: Here's Why Bolaji Ojo The counterfeiters are not winning and they won't. The industry is awash in news and research reports about surging incidents of counterfeiting in components used in aviation, consumer goods, and military equipment, but that represents only one side of the story. As counterfeiters have increased their supply of fake parts, corrupting the supply chain, so have concerned manufacturers and regulators intensified efforts to combat the trend. Component manufacturers, distributors, electronic manufacturing services (EMS) providers, and OEMs won't be able to completely scrub the supply chain of fake parts, but, quietly and intensely, they are developing and waging a fierce campaign against the counterfeiters, according to industry sources I've spoken with in the last few weeks. Some of the efforts can be attributed to the decision by Congress and the US government to make manufacturers responsible for certifying components supplied to the Department of Defense, but companies are also beginning to be strident in calling for a concerted plan to reduce counterfeiting, because the entire market gets a black eye with each reported incident. The anti-counterfeiting provision in the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) has certainly lit a fire under the industry. Attendees at a seminar on counterfeiting hosted at ES-Live (an annual conference linking up component manufacturers and purchasers) in London were warned by presenter Bob Willis to pay greater attention to their sourcing strategies, especially if they sell parts to the DoD. "You may end up in an orange suit and headed to prison," he warned. Willis, a mechanical engineer, consultant, and specialist in the detection of counterfeit parts, wasn't exaggerating the threat. The NDAA puts the onus on the manufacturer and supplier to prove components sold to the DoD were genuine. Failure to ensure this could result in prosecution and imprisonment, as other news reports have highlighted. Congress has been alarmed by a sharp rise in reported incidents of counterfeit parts supplied to the US government and has prescribed stiff penalties to combat the criminals responsible. However, as IHS noted in a recent report, suppliers who unwittingly introduce fake parts into the defense supply chain may also get prosecuted. Here are the steps defense contractors are expected to take, according to IHS's interpretation of the NDAA: Contractors are now responsible for detecting and avoiding the use or inclusion of counterfeit electronic parts or suspect counterfeit parts Contractors are also responsible for any rework or corrective action that may be required to remedy the use or inclusion of such parts Defense contracts will no longer allow the cost of counterfeit electronic parts and suspect counterfeit electronic parts or the cost associated with rework or corrective action to resolve the use or inclusion of such parts Qualification procedures and processes must be established to use trusted suppliers and procure electronics from authorized suppliers If these onerous burdens have been shifted onto suppliers and defense contractors, how come I still believe the counterfeiters are not winning? The answer is simple. Over the years and at all levels of the supply chain, companies have been introducing actions that have continually placed them several steps ahead of the counterfeiters. Also, many more companies are today willing to publicly address the subject and even admit to the discovery of fake parts in their inventories. This was not the case two years ago, when even the mere mention of counterfeit components in the same sentence with a reputable distributor's or manufacturer's name was seen as the kiss of death. Today, many companies not only admit that fake parts have been discovered in their inventories, but they'll also disclose how such components could have infiltrated the supply chain. Such public disclosures are working against the counterfeiters, who can no longer rely on the silence of victims to cloud industry visibility into the scale of the problem. In fact, the reason researchers like IHS now have more data on reported incidents is because manufacturers (OEMs, EMSs, and component suppliers) are more willing to submit information on these. Finally, manufacturers are hosting training and other educational seminars for employees, suppliers, and customers to equip them with the knowledge and tools necessary for combating, detecting, and reporting counterfeits and counterfeiters. Out of these activities have arisen technological innovations that are now being shared across the industry to fight counterfeiting. EBN blogger Douglas Alexander wrote about one of these in a recent blog, and other EBN contributors have similarly addressed the subject in various postings. In my next blog, I will focus on some of these anti-counterfeiting technological initiatives. EBN will also be hosting a series of online educational sessions on this. Stay tuned.
本文为国际电子商情原创文章,未经授权禁止转载。请尊重知识产权,违者本司保留追究责任的权利。
  • 微信扫一扫,一键转发

  • 关注“国际电子商情” 微信公众号

您可能感兴趣的文章

相关推荐

可能感兴趣的话题