Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Judge orders Uber not to use technology taken from Waymo

seattletimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 134 posts

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

#41

Post by gremlinsinc »

manyoso wrote: post #29
pfarnsworth wrote: post #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…

I think Waymo laywers are very happy with the expedited discovery ruling and the order that Uber must make every effort to compel the return of the 14,000 files. This might not have been the bombshell ruling against Uber that they were hoping for, but it sets up that bombshell ruling if they can actually find the evidence with this new discovery.

how do they enforce this though? I mean they can return the files, but could have hidden copies any number of places.

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

#42

Post by rotflmao »

swang wrote: post #21
rotflmao wrote: post #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 th…

1. why are you posting on a new account? it is obvious by your edit that you post regularly on here. 2. the article has mostly the same exact info you've posted. what "extreme media bias" are you talking about? 3. you write that their trade secret claims are an "overreach" yet that is only half the story. the judge thought most of the claims were weak, but that there was sufficient evidence to issue the injunction. s…

1) I don't post with my account in flamewar topics because of fanboy downvotes.

2) The article omits pretty much any important detail that is in favor of this boogeyman company so readers assume the absolute worst. Check out pfarnsworth's comments here to see that this is actually a ruling very much in Uber's favor. He did a better job of commenting than me.

I'm also pro-Apple, pro-Monsanto, pro-Facebook and pro-every-other-company journalists love to hate and only tell one side of the story because I've personally seen my company maligned unfairly by the media.

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

#43

Post by megamindbrian »

enraged_camel wrote: post #39
eddieplan9 wrote: post #36

The title screams bias and misinformation. It presumes Uber took technology from Waymo, which the judge rules against by stating that "Waymo’s patent theories are too weak to support any provisional relief" and "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".

>>It presumes Uber took technology from Waymo, which the judge rules against FTFA: "Judge William Alsup in San Francisco says in the ruling that Waymo has shown “compelling evidence” that a former star engineer named Anthony Levandowski downloaded confidential files before leaving Waymo. The Judge also says evidence shows that before he left Waymo, Levandowski and Uber planned for Uber to acquire a company formed by…

Wow I didn't know there was more than one way to write Monte Carlo, Haar, Point-cloud algorithms. At what point does "hire an engineer to do something" become "common-knowledge"?

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

#44

Post by eddieplan9 »

enraged_camel wrote: post #39
eddieplan9 wrote: post #36

The title screams bias and misinformation. It presumes Uber took technology from Waymo, which the judge rules against by stating that "Waymo’s patent theories are too weak to support any provisional relief" and "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".

>>It presumes Uber took technology from Waymo, which the judge rules against FTFA: "Judge William Alsup in San Francisco says in the ruling that Waymo has shown “compelling evidence” that a former star engineer named Anthony Levandowski downloaded confidential files before leaving Waymo. The Judge also says evidence shows that before he left Waymo, Levandowski and Uber planned for Uber to acquire a company formed by…

And you can reasonably draw the conclusion that is a plot for stealing technology? It's perfectly reasonable to tell someone that, go make an MVP and we will acquire it.

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

#45

Post by phamilton »

tomglynch wrote: post #2

How do they go about enforcing this?

As I understand it, Google is granted expedited discovery and Uber basically has to allow Google to give a stamp of approval that they aren't using stolen tech.

I imagine that puts the burden of proof of "stolen tech" on Google though, so they can't just make claims without evidence.

Any attorneys want to confirm/correct my understanding?

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

#46

Post by oculusthrift »

darwhy wrote: post #35
swang wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. why are you posting on a new account? it is obvious by your edit that you post regularly on here. 2. the article has mostly the same exact info you've posted. what "extreme media bias" are you talking about? 3. you write that their trade secret claims are an "overreach" yet that is only half the story. the judge thought most of the claims were weak, but that there was sufficient evidence to issue the injunction. s…

With how many questionable practices Uber is guilty of partaking in, I wouldn't be surprised if attempting to manipulate Hacker News was one of them.

think it's funny you say that when the company I see the most employees from on HN is Google.

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

#47

Post by dpiers »

golfer wrote: post #6

Link to the full injunction text: https://www.scribd.com/document/348409551/Waymo-Uber-Injunct...

"3 pages available to preview"

Man I hate Scribd. Why does anyone use it? No, I do not want to download your app to read a PDF, and I don't understand why CNBC published it through your service.

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

#48

Post by phamilton »

gremlinsinc wrote: post #41
manyoso wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Waymo laywers are very happy with the expedited discovery ruling and the order that Uber must make every effort to compel the return of the 14,000 files. This might not have been the bombshell ruling against Uber that they were hoping for, but it sets up that bombshell ruling if they can actually find the evidence with this new discovery.

how do they enforce this though? I mean they can return the files, but could have hidden copies any number of places.

Returning the files proves he has them. This isn't restitution, it's a play for an employer to skirt the 5th amendment. While he will not be forced to testify against himself, his employment is now tied to his willingness to do so.

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

#49

Post by rotflmao »

techinformed56 wrote: post #25
employee8000 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

But I do agree with media bias. The main case was "Injunction". Not a case against Anthony. "Actual case" was Waymo seeking protection for what they claim 121 trade secrets and hence prevent Uber from dong self driving tests. Specifically on that Judge ruled following “General approaches dictated by well-known principles of physics, however, are not “secret,” since they consist essentially of general engineering prin…

This. Make some company out to be the boogeyman du jour, then tell that lie often enough until most people believe it and it has spread all the way around the world with no chance of the truth catching up. It's bullshit, and I'm amazed that so many HNers that typically express healthy skepticism fall for it.

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

#50

Post by ariwilson »

eddieplan9 wrote: post #36

The title screams bias and misinformation. It presumes Uber took technology from Waymo, which the judge rules against by stating that "Waymo’s patent theories are too weak to support any provisional relief" and "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".

Are you an Uber employee? Curious for full disclosure.

I'm an Alphabet employee but not one working on Waymo-related projects, nor am I a lawyer who feels qualified to comment on this situation. Wish Groklaw was still around to interpret these rulings for us :(.

Post reply on HN