141–150 of 305 posts
What if Uber is actually innocent? I've always just assumed they are guilty and planned this all along.
Note that "Uber" actually includes Ottomotto LLC, which is a named defendant, and whose assets and liabilities belong to Uber. Constructing a scenario where Levandowski is at fault but both Ottomotto LLC and Uber, excluding Ottomotto, are innocent is tricky.
OK: Here is some context for those who aren't current on the case. One result of the injunction (all of the hearings up until now) was that uber needs to use all of its power to compel levandowski to testify, the extreme limit of which is firing him. Uber followed through as was legally required This is one part of a number of things that came out of preliminary injunction hearings, other parts are (1) the breadth of…
The court can't order a private entity to fire a private employee. They did this because they know they are probably going to lose this case, and it will be harder for Waymo to show that Uber's conduct was willful now that they have fired the main person involved. They want to be able to say "as soon as we were sure that some of this was stolen, we fired the person that did it". That may make a settlement more palata…
Its also entirely unclear if they will actually lose the case or not. Comments made in the PI ruling make it seem very ambiguous, and it will hinge on the results of further discovery. If no new relevant evidence is found in discover, uber will be found innocent.
Link to formal termination letter: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/files/2017/0... The termination letter indicates that the termination is for cause and may have implications on stock awards and other compensation: "Under the Stock Award and other agreements, you are entitled to 20 days to cure the events that give rise to this termination for Cause. This letter constitutes the “prior written notice”…
This is probably costing Levandowski many many millions of dollars. Uber bought Otto for 1% of Uber stock valued at around $700 million. A good chunk of that was owed to Levandowski at some unknown vesting/performance schedule. Otto employees are also owed a fifth of any future Uber trucking profits.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Google's suit is against Uber, not Levendowski, who could now spill beans on all sorts of unsuspected malfeasance. At this point what has he got to lose? If he decides to cooperate with google things could get very interesting. Google's suit is against Uber, not Levendowski, because Uber has the capital to go after. I Am Not An IP Lawyer, but I'd guess that if Levendowski had substantial assets, he'd be named a part…
Google's employment contract with Levendowski specified that all disputes are resolved by arbitration rather than court.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know much - but perhaps Google could make a deal with Levandowski that if he spills the beans on what Uber did, then Google won't go after him? Google obviously has much more to gain by suing Uber than suing a dude. If Google needs information, and Levandowski has that information, it would seem to be a good deal. But if there's also possible criminal proceedings, Levandowski would need to make a similar deal…
Eh. Waymo definitely worries about Uber as a competitor, and in general many people have a distaste for Uber's culture and values. But there's still a pretty stark line between being a strategic competitor and being a scummy traitor who steals trade secrets and the labor of his coworkers. If it came down to a choice between shutting down Uber's self-driving car program and ruining Levandowski, I'm sure a lot of peopl…
I was thinking simply, "too little, too late" but then realized this could be quite interesting. Uber's model in most domains is to push hard over the line in the hopes of moving that line. More charitably this could be called "ask for forgiveness rather than permission". So canning Levendowski could be seen as simply a case of this. But Google's suit is against Uber, not Levendowski, who could now spill beans on all…
If Levandowski is targeted by federal prosecutors, can he argue inevitable discovery based on existing public domain principles and papers (textbooks, etc.)?
I find it hard to believe that Google is the only innovator in Lidar thus far. It just seems like they are because it's now cool.
Link to formal termination letter: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/files/2017/0... The termination letter indicates that the termination is for cause and may have implications on stock awards and other compensation: "Under the Stock Award and other agreements, you are entitled to 20 days to cure the events that give rise to this termination for Cause. This letter constitutes the “prior written notice”…
IANAL but doesn't the letter's language ("that termination shall become effective 20 days from today") imply that he has 20 days to fix things, and that the termination is not a already done deal?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know much - but perhaps Google could make a deal with Levandowski that if he spills the beans on what Uber did, then Google won't go after him? Google obviously has much more to gain by suing Uber than suing a dude. If Google needs information, and Levandowski has that information, it would seem to be a good deal. But if there's also possible criminal proceedings, Levandowski would need to make a similar deal…
I have to imagine that google also wants to set a precedent that they won't tolerate people stealing their trade secrets.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you've ever held an influential job -- even briefly -- with the No. 1 player in a big industry, there's always someone farther down the pyramid that is willing to give you a second chance, third chance, etc. No matter what got you fired. Think of it from the standpoint of a small-company CEO, on the margins, trying to get traction any way possible. Yes, 90% of them won't want to hire you -- at least on 90% of the…
And if you're a smaller fish than Google or Uber you probably have less IP for him to steal anyway. Plus you have the benefit of hindsight to watch him more closely and keep evidence of any wrongdoing he might try.