Live data from Hacker News

Judge orders Uber not to use technology taken from Waymo

seattletimes.com

11–20 of 134 posts

Re: Judge orders Uber not to use technology taken from Waymo

#12
post #5

How do they go about enforcing this?

That's my question. Given that Uber claims they weren't using the technology... how can you tell if they stopped? Just forbid them from using LIDAR altogether?

Waymo is allowed to look at the devices and supporting documentation and see if there is any stolen IP.

Re: Judge orders Uber not to use technology taken from Waymo

#13
Wow, this article is so far off the ruling. Alsup found the patent infringement cases meritless and said Waymo's trade secret claims are an overreach and that Waymo is trying to claim ownership over general principles and approaches in the field.

Uber will be allowed to keep working on the SDCs and on LIDAR. Only strikes against Uber is that Levandowski can't work on LIDAR, which Uber already took action on before the injunction was unsealed, and the discovery rights granted to Waymo.

This article is a perfect example of the extreme media bias against Uber.

Edit: two downvotes within seconds of posting the truth? I know that downvote baiting is frowned upon but these posts are filled with so many people astroturfing for Google, Waymo and Lyft that this comment is going to get downvoted anyways, because some people really don't want the truth to be the most upvoted comment. Honestly all these stories look like the Apple stories that inevitable turn into fanboy flamewars. There are so many HNers with conflicts of interest upvoting these stories and participating in them that almost none of the comments can be trusted as genuine or rational.

Re: Judge orders Uber not to use technology taken from Waymo

#14
post #7

Is this enforceable? Or is it more of a "If you get caught using it in the future more legal ramifications?"

Violating a judgment would invite contempt proceedings, which means huge fines for Uber and possible prison for all involved senior executives.

Sure, theoretically they are required to follow this and the consequences for not doing so are dire. In practice, however, is there any way for the judge to know if Uber is complying, or does this essentially rely on the honor system?

Re: Judge orders Uber not to use technology taken from Waymo

#15
Some highlights from the injunction:

1. "Waymo’s patent theories are too weak to support any provisional relief."

2. "By contrast, the trade secrets case presented by Waymo does warrant provisional relief."

3. "Moreover, it has become clear that Waymo has both overreached in defining its trade secrets and made moving targets out of its asserted trade secrets to evade defensive arguments. Under these circumstances and on this record, no adverse inference that could be drawn in Waymo’s favor would justify overlooking these problems, pretending that all 121 of Waymo’s asserted trade secrets are valid, and enjoining defendants from using any of them so as to effectively halt Uber’s self-driving efforts until trial."

4. "Waymo is hereby granted further expedited discovery in aid of possible further provisional relief. Subject to the protective order, and upon reasonable notice, Waymo’s counsel and one expert may inspect any and all aspects of defendants’ ongoingwork involving LiDAR — including, without limitation,schematics, work orders, source code, notes, and emails — whether or not said work resulted in any prototype or device."

EDIT: one more I forgot, which is interesting:

5. This order, however, threatens no sanctions against Levandowski. It simply directs Uber, a private employer, to do whatever it can to ensure that its employees return 14,000-plus pilfered files to their rightful owner. If Uber were to threaten Levandowski with termination for noncompliance,that threat would be backed up by only Uber’s power as a private employer, and Levandowski would remainfree to forfeit his private employment to preserve his Fifth Amendment privilege. No binding case law holdsthat the Fifth Amendment prohibits such actions by private employers. In short, in complying with this order,Uber has no excuse under the Fifth Amendment to pull any punches as to Levandowski.

Basically, if Levandowski refuses to turn over the documents, Uber is forced to fire him, which means the $250,000,000 they already gave him goes up in smoke.

Re: Judge orders Uber not to use technology taken from Waymo

#18

Wow, this article is so far off the ruling. Alsup found the patent infringement cases meritless and said Waymo's trade secret claims are an overreach and that Waymo is trying to claim ownership over general principles and approaches in the field. Uber will be allowed to keep working on the SDCs and on LIDAR. Only strikes against Uber is that Levandowski can't work on LIDAR, which Uber already took action on before th…

I find your analysis to be incorrect. To avoid needless bickering about it, here are the first few paragraphs of the ruling, which people can derive their own conclusions from:

"By way of summary, this order finds plaintiff Waymo LLC has shown compellingevidence that its former star engineer, Anthony Levandowski, downloaded over 14,000confidential files from Waymo immediately before leaving his employment there. The evidenceshows that, both before and after his departure, Levandowski and defendant Uber Technologies,Inc., planned for Uber to acquire Levandowski’s new companies, defendants Ottomotto LLCand Otto Trucking LLC, and to hire Levandowski as the head of its self-driving car efforts. Moreover, defendants and Levandowski anticipated and took steps to defend against litigationwith Waymo in connection with his move to Uber. Significantly, the evidence indicates that, during the acquisition, Uber likely knew or at least should have known that Levandowski had taken and retained possession of Waymo’s confidential files. Waymo has also sufficientlyshown, for purposes of the instant motion only, that the 14,000-plus purloined files likelycontain at least some trade secrets, and that some provisional relief is warranted while this case progresses toward trial. The scope of relief warranted at this stage, however, is limited byseveral countervailing factors. As nonexhaustive examples, not all of Waymo’s 121 asserted trade secrets actually qualify as such, and few have been traced into the accused technology. Waymo’s patent infringement accusations on this motion also proved meritless. Accordingly,this order grants important but narrowly-tailored provisional relief necessary to equitably balance the parties’ competing needs at this stage. Now follow the details."

Re: Judge orders Uber not to use technology taken from Waymo

#19

Wow, this article is so far off the ruling. Alsup found the patent infringement cases meritless and said Waymo's trade secret claims are an overreach and that Waymo is trying to claim ownership over general principles and approaches in the field. Uber will be allowed to keep working on the SDCs and on LIDAR. Only strikes against Uber is that Levandowski can't work on LIDAR, which Uber already took action on before th…

It's only hacker news, don't get so worked up. People are allowed to disagree with you regardless of what you feel your best intentions are. Why do you care what anonymous internet people think?

Re: Judge orders Uber not to use technology taken from Waymo

#20

Wow, this article is so far off the ruling. Alsup found the patent infringement cases meritless and said Waymo's trade secret claims are an overreach and that Waymo is trying to claim ownership over general principles and approaches in the field. Uber will be allowed to keep working on the SDCs and on LIDAR. Only strikes against Uber is that Levandowski can't work on LIDAR, which Uber already took action on before th…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN