Anthony Levandowski Charged with Theft of Trade Secrets

Post by usrusr » Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 8:08 PM UTC

debt wrote: post #143

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…

“Levandowski was paid a bonus of $120 million while at Google” God forbid an engineer get paid what he’s actually worth. If anything he should’ve been paid much more . The automobile industry is a multi trillion dollar industry he’d be be disrupting. Honestly, Google may have been paying him to “die” like tech companies do sometimes as rationale for acquisition: to eliminate competition. Maybe he picked up on it and…

Post by walshemj » Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 8:12 PM UTC

pcwalton wrote: post #103

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…

> So this movement toward resolving such conflicts in the courts, instead of by companies competing to out-innovate one another, is very troubling. 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 a…

Post by throwaway_law » Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 8:15 PM UTC

DenisM wrote: post #134

throwaway_law wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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. You should go back to it, as those are examples of why ethics are needed more than ever. As someone in the "trenches" and who sees the damage done by them everyday, I'd suggest you can point to the trail of damage they left in their wake and the real lives th…

> In the case of Uber I would simply start with highlighting the number of drivers who now have criminal records as a result of doing nothing more than driving for Uber Do you have a link? I found nothing of the kind on google.

Post by kragen » Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 8:17 PM UTC

walshemj wrote: post #173

pcwalton wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So this movement toward resolving such conflicts in the courts, instead of by companies competing to out-innovate one another, is very troubling. 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 a…

And from all accounts Shockly was a hard man to work for.

Post by sangnoir » Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 8:24 PM UTC

dmix wrote: post #9

minimaxir wrote: post #4

Official filing: https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndca/pr/former-uber-self-drivin... PDF: https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndca/press-release/file/1197991...

> The prosecution is being handled by the Office of the U.S. Attorney, Northern District of California’s new Corporate Fraud Strike Force I'm curious if this explains the delayed timing... New agency team gets started and looks around for the biggest fish to fry. Everyone already dislikes Uber and AI is big right now so it's win-win. Smart move by the prosecutors if so. (Or it could just be a long process due to the…