Anthony Levandowski Charged with Theft of Trade Secrets • Hacker News Board

Re: Anthony Levandowski Charged with Theft of Trade Secrets

#81

Post by nwsm » Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 6:39 PM UTC

kragen wrote: post #44

"Theft of trade secrets" is how Silicon Valley was built. Fairchild was "theft of trade secrets" from Shockley; Intel was "theft of trade secrets" from Fairchild. When Camenzind left Signetics and designed the 555 (under contract to Signetics), he was "using trade secrets" of Signetics; in today's legal environment, they could have just ordered him to stick around as an employee and work on a less risky project. MOST…

>Engineers create wealth. Lawyers and investors just compete to privatize it.

That's a really naive and pretentious opinion

Re: Anthony Levandowski Charged with Theft of Trade Secrets

#82

Post by simplify » Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 6:40 PM UTC

inlined wrote: post #35

throwaway_law wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>never liked when rules got in the way of progress. Yes, that seems to be the Silicon Valley Culture. "Move fast and break things" "Its better to apologize and seek forgiveness, than ask for permission" "Though the most successful founders are usually good people, they tend to have a piratical gleam in their eye. They're not Goody Two-Shoes type good. Morally, they care about getting the big questions right, but not…

I used to go back to my university and speak at the ethics class in my recruiting trips. I stopped after people’s questions changed to “Uber, Airbnb, etc all succeeded because they broke the law. Why are ethics important?” and I had no real answer.

As a side note, ethics and legality are not the same thing. Something could be legal and still be ethically questionable.

Re: Anthony Levandowski Charged with Theft of Trade Secrets

#83

Post by rongenre » Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 6:40 PM UTC

unscrupulous_sw wrote: post #39

> It is not uncommon for tech companies, which fiercely guard their intellectual property, to sue former employees or the firms they join after they leave. Is it really that common? I feel like most software engineers don't really take intellectual property all that seriously. Most will not think twice about backing up emails when leaving the company which might contain code diffs, design docs, etc. Friends from diff…

It's red-line different to take one's skills and know-how and experiences with you than to copy documents and designs from one's current employer and take them to a new gig, especially at the executive level.

Re: Anthony Levandowski Charged with Theft of Trade Secrets

#84

Post by JumpCrisscross » Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 6:40 PM UTC

inlined wrote: post #35

throwaway_law wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>never liked when rules got in the way of progress. Yes, that seems to be the Silicon Valley Culture. "Move fast and break things" "Its better to apologize and seek forgiveness, than ask for permission" "Though the most successful founders are usually good people, they tend to have a piratical gleam in their eye. They're not Goody Two-Shoes type good. Morally, they care about getting the big questions right, but not…

I used to go back to my university and speak at the ethics class in my recruiting trips. I stopped after people’s questions changed to “Uber, Airbnb, etc all succeeded because they broke the law. Why are ethics important?” and I had no real answer.

> “Uber, Airbnb, etc all succeeded because they broke the law. Why are ethics important?” and I had no real answer.

I'll try my hand at an answer.

First, what is legal and what is ethical are not the same. New York City's pre-Uber taxi industry was racist, exploitative and ripe with fraud. Uber disrupted that cesspool. As recently as 2015, Uber was popular enough among average New Yorkers that it could mobilize grassroots support to rival the mayor [1].

Second, there are degrees of lawbreaking. Jaywalking is lawbreaking. Civil municipal regulation violation, which encompasses most of Uber and Airbnb's early mischievousness, is lawbreaking. Sexual harassment and fraud, on the other hand, are criminally illegal. We have different bands of consequences for different bands of infractions for a reason. Lumping together fraud and jaywalking is facile.

When Uber was busting taxi trusts, they were popular and powerful. When it abused that trust with their god mode and promotion of workplace harassment and overrunning of drivers' rights, their CEO got axed. Society innately and politically recognizes ethics, particularly if the public (e.g. activists, journalists, et cetera) document gross violations.

[1] https://www.fastcompany.com/90237321/the-inside-story-of-how...

Re: Anthony Levandowski Charged with Theft of Trade Secrets

#85

Post by tempsy » Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 6:41 PM UTC

cletus wrote: post #53

The level of greed, hubris and stupidity of some people never ceases to amaze me. Levandowski was paid a bonus of $120 million while at Google, which is more money than any reasonable person will need for several lifetimes. This was actually a running joke at Google (while I was still there) to describe $120M as "1 Levadownski". Like Sundar one year was described as earning "only 1.7 Levadownskis" (he got paid $200M…

The max fine of $8m is tiny compared to what he made.

Re: Anthony Levandowski Charged with Theft of Trade Secrets

#86

Post by paul7986 » Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 6:41 PM UTC

paul7986 wrote: post #62

I use to feel bad for Google and wanted this thief to face justice. But umm he's just doing what he witnessed and was taught(told) to do while working for the big G. Google blatantly steals IP from the biggest fish to the little dreamers they inspire and such is well documented. See this popular HN thread... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18566929

Why is this point being downvoted? It is not relevant to this discussion or it's something else???

Again It's well documented the big G steals IP!!

Re: Anthony Levandowski Charged with Theft of Trade Secrets

#87

Post by greenyoda » Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 6:42 PM UTC

oneepic wrote: post #68

Can someone explain the difference between this situation and the following situation: - engineer at Company A has expertise in a certain field, and is really, really good at solving problems in this field and knowing what to do next at any point in time. They bring quality to Company A's systems. - engineer moves to Company B to do the same kind of work, and uses their expertise to bring Company B's systems up to hi…

"Must have stolen trade secrets" won't stand up in court. They'd have to enumerate which specific trade secrets were allegedly stolen, prove that they were indeed trade secrets and not something that lots of senior engineers could figure out on their own, etc.

Levandowski was charged with stealing specific files and designs, not trade secrets in general.

Re: Anthony Levandowski Charged with Theft of Trade Secrets

#88

Post by psychometry » Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 6:42 PM UTC

kragen wrote: post #67

javert wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I live in a poor country which is poor mostly because the established economic powers are able to strangle new centers of wealth creation in the cradle, using the government and laws. Don't let that happen in your country. Is there any country in the world that still prioritizes freedom over having a massive regulatory state? It would surprise me.

Governments do not prioritize the freedom of their subjects; it's contrary to the incentives of everyone in the government. People win freedom by limiting the powers governments have over them.

[flagged]

Re: Anthony Levandowski Charged with Theft of Trade Secrets

#89

Post by panopticon » Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 6:42 PM UTC

kragen wrote: post #61

TheMagicHorsey wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's an element of truth in what you are saying. But in this case Lewendowski didn't build the stolen technology. He misappropriated the work of other engineers at Google. It would be one thing if he just left with his own work. That would be more understandable.

I agree that Levandowski didn't invent everything he "stole", but this is not significant from the point of view of legal precedent — whether you write code at work or your coworker writes the code, the law considers it to belong to your employer — and some of the cases I mentioned above also included the departure of executives, not just engineers. (Edited to clarify and correct spelling.)

> this is not significant from the point of view of legal precedent

It's incredibly significant. Those cases you mentioned above were civil suites; this is a criminal charge brought by prosecutors. Totally different ball game.

Re: Anthony Levandowski Charged with Theft of Trade Secrets

#90

Post by nwsm » Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 6:43 PM UTC

oneepic wrote: post #68

Can someone explain the difference between this situation and the following situation: - engineer at Company A has expertise in a certain field, and is really, really good at solving problems in this field and knowing what to do next at any point in time. They bring quality to Company A's systems. - engineer moves to Company B to do the same kind of work, and uses their expertise to bring Company B's systems up to hi…

Read the article and you'll know the difference.