Live data from Hacker News

Magic Leap Says Ex-Engineer Copied Headset for China

bloomberg.com

21–30 of 110 posts

Re: Magic Leap Says Ex-Engineer Copied Headset for China

#21
post #12
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but crucially, does not allege that Chi exfiltrated any CI/trade secrets or infringed on any IP Their complaint alleges exactly that, repeatedly.

Nowhere in the complaint do they ever mention a single specific bit of technology, code, design or patent stolen by Chi Xu. Their entire argument is that he signed a confidentiality agreement when he started working there so should not be able to start a competing company. This is going to be next to impossible to enforce in California, let alone China.

The comment I'm replying to says that they don't allege he improperly took their confidential information. This isn't an accurate representation of their allegations. They do allege that, over and over. I don't have any opinions on (or much interest in) the merits of their case, but "they don't even say he took their CI" is not true. They quite plainly do. They say things like:

"in reality, the Nreal Light incorporates and derives from the Confidential Designs and other Magic Leap Confidential Information protected by the PIIA."

Re: Magic Leap Says Ex-Engineer Copied Headset for China

#22
post #18
post #3

Read the complaint here https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/15787938/1/magic-leap-i...

Summary of the evidence presented in the complaint: 1) Using the same proprietary font in their logo was a really dumb idea: > https://i.imgur.com/7pYZ8bp.png 2) Alleges he engaged in internal meetings "outside the scope of his work at Magic Leap" in order to gain useful information, while simultaneously neglecting his duties at work as he planned to start his own company in China. Before launching a product that loo…

Why on earth does a pre-revenue startup need a proprietary font design?

Re: Magic Leap Says Ex-Engineer Copied Headset for China

#23
post #19

Edit: Deleting this comment. I don't know enough about the subject matter to speak as confidently as I was.

Magic Leap actually have a product and it's actually pretty damn good at what it does. What they don't have is revenue. There just isn't a big enough market for mixed reality headsets.

Re: Magic Leap Says Ex-Engineer Copied Headset for China

#24
post #7

Nreal optical hardware is closer to ODGs and very different to Magic Leap. Magic Leap acquired ODG patent portfolio recently (after effectively killing them via some backstabby acquisition shenanigans) and is now opportunistically patent trolling Nreal and the increasing amount of Chinese competition (Nreal has much better visual quality at a much lower price) using post rationalized accusations given current US-Chin…

Liar, everyone here know what is the Chinese policy: stole everything, try to make it better. Everywhere you can find this behavior from electric cars to CPUs, to OS ... etc

Re: Magic Leap Says Ex-Engineer Copied Headset for China

#25
post #7

Nreal optical hardware is closer to ODGs and very different to Magic Leap. Magic Leap acquired ODG patent portfolio recently (after effectively killing them via some backstabby acquisition shenanigans) and is now opportunistically patent trolling Nreal and the increasing amount of Chinese competition (Nreal has much better visual quality at a much lower price) using post rationalized accusations given current US-Chin…

> and is now opportunistically patent trolling Nreal

Are you making this up?

I don't see any patent claim being mentioned in the article.

Re: Magic Leap Says Ex-Engineer Copied Headset for China

#26
post #19

Edit: Deleting this comment. I don't know enough about the subject matter to speak as confidently as I was.

While your comment has merit, I think it’s unfair to compare Magic Leap to Theranos. One did actual bloodwork on people and fucked with your health...the other promised a whale jumping in a gym...

Business practice/promise aside, Theranos had the ability to negatively influence a person’s health. Magic Leap can only under deliver.

Re: Magic Leap Says Ex-Engineer Copied Headset for China

#27
post #18
post #3

Read the complaint here https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/15787938/1/magic-leap-i...

Summary of the evidence presented in the complaint: 1) Using the same proprietary font in their logo was a really dumb idea: > https://i.imgur.com/7pYZ8bp.png 2) Alleges he engaged in internal meetings "outside the scope of his work at Magic Leap" in order to gain useful information, while simultaneously neglecting his duties at work as he planned to start his own company in China. Before launching a product that loo…

> Using the exact same proprietary font in their logo was a really dumb idea

It’s not the same font. Similar but not the same. Look at letter L and A. They are different

Re: Magic Leap Says Ex-Engineer Copied Headset for China

#29
post #19

Edit: Deleting this comment. I don't know enough about the subject matter to speak as confidently as I was.

I understand where you're coming from but the difference is that Theranos claims were literally impossible due to how human skin and circulatory system works. Whereas Magic Leap AR is only extremely difficult. If they throw enough billions at it they might eventually ship something that sort of works.

Re: Magic Leap Says Ex-Engineer Copied Headset for China

#30
I don't know the full story here and have not taken the time to dive into it. Perhaps I will later. I just want to make a quick comment based on some of the responses I've seen.

Having been the subject of market research, product plan and intellectual property theft in the past (no, not by the Chinese) and having that information used to launch a competing business I think I have perspective to offer on this.

There is HUGE difference between "R&D" and just "D". "R&D" is slow, costly and full of risk. "D" simply requires execution. Borrowing from sports talk, you know "where the puck is going" and you can aim in that direction. You don't have to invent much and you actually have the luxury of improving upon what you know is and will be the technology of the "R&D" shop from which you stole.

One of the mantras of YC startups goes something like "if you are not embarrassed by your first product...". This is usually true for hardware as well. And, in most instances, you actually know very well what you'd like to build next. However, hardware isn't a simple matter of a weekend pivot. You just don't have that freedom. Not even close. So you have to go with what you have, get it to market, make some money with it and look at introducing your "next generation" product a year later. You can't do hardware spins in a couple of months. The greater the volume the more you are shackled to whatever you are shipping and it can easily be a year or more before you can put out a significantly updated version 2.

I've seen comments about optics being sub-par and more. Well, that's the kind of thing that can happen when you are doing "R&D" and you have to put out a product. It could be embarrassing, but that's what you brought to the party and that's what has to ship.

The thief, on the other hand, knows what you are shipping, what's ugly about it, your future plans, market intelligence and much, much more. Upon gaining this information all they have to do is align it with funding and execute on your version 2 or 3 way before you do. While you are busy building a company the thief can surface out of seemingly nowhere with a product that your first product can't compete with.

This is PRECISELY what happened to me nearly twenty years ago. Our resellers, from the US, Europe, Asia and other areas started to call me out of nowhere to ask if we had licensed our products to company X. One of them made an interesting comment, he said: "Martin, the material they sent me sounds and reads exactly like what we've been talking about for more than a year" (under NDA, of course).

Company X came into the market and put our product --which was going to be replaced in about six months-- to shame. And they did it with MY product plan, MY specification, MY design, MY market intelligence. The net effect was that, ironically, when we came out with our product WE looked like we copied from them. Which was the proverbial addition of "insult to injury".

Anyhow, not defending anyone. I don't know enough. Just wanted to react to some of the comments that point out the thief's product is better than the original. Well, yeah. It would be.

Post reply on HN