101–110 of 372 posts
Interesting this is only against Anthony and not Uber this time. The stakes seem much smaller here. I would be surprised if he actually goes to prison for this. And max fine of $8 million or so is small for him
> 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…
"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…
A lot of the things you cite were actually fought out in the courts. Motorola sued MOS Technology [1]. AMD and Intel have been in constant legal battles since their inception. The complicated question of Unix ownership started the famous SCO-Linux litigation. This isn't anything new.
And Anthony Levandowski is one of the least sympathetic figures in the industry; virtually no story about people who worked for him has been a positive one. I have sympathy for ordinary senior engineers getting strangled by non-compete agreements. Not for Levandowski.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOS_Technology_6502#Motorola_l...
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…
There is not and there should not be any hard cap on what is 'reasonable' in a lifetime. Maybe someone wants to make money so they can get their name on a wing of a hospital or fund their alma matter. Forget the 'good cause means it's ok' angle as well. Maybe you are ok living a particular way but that doesn't mean others are or that you are reasonable and they are not.
Also plenty of good comes out of the world (as well as bad) because of people's pursuit of money, fame etc. If everyone was just content with very little many things we enjoy today would not exist. And maybe that wouldn't matter to you (not you but 'you') but just the same I don't like sports but I recognize others do and find enjoyment in their lives (or video games).
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 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 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…
> Why someone would risk jail time doing something so clearly wrong (taking material trade secrets from an employer) for even more money In particular 'for even more money'. You are assuming that the motivating factor was money. People do all sorts of things when no money or financial gain is involved at all. Sometimes just to enjoy the pleasure of being aberrant. Take hacking as one example.
That doesn't excuse stealing, but it might not be as simple as greed or hubris.
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…
It's weird walking away from 120 million but I think I might get what he was thinking. He was probably over confident with the tech, and thought it was close to roll out. He was also probably thinking the tech was worth billions. I bet Anthony felt he built the tech himself and he owned it. He probably wanted and felt like he deserved a bigger piece of the multi billon dollar self driving pie than just 120 million.
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…
But his former employer is no different as Google blatantly steals IP themselves and gets caught in the process! See this popular HN thread https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18566929 You want to see him strung up for ripping off a company whose does the same thing and he probably witnessed and was taught to do it there(directly or indirectly).
Those who downvote this are doing so because You don't believe Google does exactly what Anthony did? That Google is a company who does no evil?
What I'm saying is relevant and truthful and as noted clearly well documented!