Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would be relatively tame compared to what kinds of actions the German culture is quite easy to associate with.
Like? Socks in sandals?
Sauerkraut and such of course.
Nvidia sued for stealing trade secrets: blunder showed rival company's code
121–130 of 242 posts
Re: Nvidia sued for stealing trade secrets: blunder showed rival company's code
#122I seriously do not understand why any employee would steal their previous employers' code to use at a new employer.
There's little-to-no personal upside, and only horrible downside if you get caught.
I mean, this guy:
> Moniruzzaman allegedly gave his personal email unauthorized access to Valeo's systems to steal "tens of thousands of files" and 6GB of source code shortly after that development... Valeo said its former employee admitted to stealing its software and that German police found its documentation and hardware pinned on Moniruzzaman's walls when his home was raided.
And while Nvidia presumably hired him for his expertise, they certainly didn't expect him to be stealing code, not even wink-wink-nudge-nudge. Corporate lawyers at trillion-dollar-companies take this stuff super seriously.
So this guy puts himself at massive legal risk... for what? So he can slack off for a few months while he pretends to write code that's already been written -- and gets to browse Reddit? Or so he can deliver code extra-fast in hopes of a quicker promotion -- that may or may not come? Is that really worth it?
It's crazy to me. Why would you risk that?
Re: Nvidia sued for stealing trade secrets: blunder showed rival company's code
#123One of the generally accepted reasons why its hard to get graphics companies to open source their drives has always been that everybody is violating everybody else's patents. And while everybody knows this making it too obvious is a legal disadvantage. But I hadn't expected it was also true of copyright.
AMD has open source drivers so it's basically just NVIDIA that doesn't.
Unless you already want to count intel, not sure if they count as actual products or are still in early access.
Re: Nvidia sued for stealing trade secrets: blunder showed rival company's code
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Violating patents is one thing, as you're only violating the concept/idea, but the implementation is still up to you The concept/idea is not what is patented. The patent is (or should be) for the specific execution of the idea. Competitors are free to implement their feature using methods other that what is covered by the patent, even if the end result gives the exact same functionality.
>The concept/idea is not what is patented. The patent is (or should be) for the specific execution of the idea. Have you ever seen patents? They rarely cover the implementation details, or at most they're intentionally super vague about that, most of the time it's just the general idea on how the widget would work and what it does, but not how to implement it technically.
[deleted]
Re: Nvidia sued for stealing trade secrets: blunder showed rival company's code
#125TFA makes it sound as if the entirety of the blame can be placed on one employee. Sure, his actions do seem to support that view, but then again, Nvidia did hire him precisely for his previous experience at this rival company, on the very same project that the two companies were partnered on, which is the same project that Nvidia hired him for. There is no argument to be made that Nvidia wasn't aware he'd be coming w…
So... noncompetes, except for the hiring company?
Re: Nvidia sued for stealing trade secrets: blunder showed rival company's code
#126One of the generally accepted reasons why its hard to get graphics companies to open source their drives has always been that everybody is violating everybody else's patents. And while everybody knows this making it too obvious is a legal disadvantage. But I hadn't expected it was also true of copyright.
AMD has open source drivers so it's basically just NVIDIA that doesn't. Unless you already want to count intel, not sure if they count as actual products or are still in early access.
Intel’s Linux drivers are also open source IIRC.
Re: Nvidia sued for stealing trade secrets: blunder showed rival company's code
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Violating patents is one thing, as you're only violating the concept/idea, but the implementation is still up to you The concept/idea is not what is patented. The patent is (or should be) for the specific execution of the idea. Competitors are free to implement their feature using methods other that what is covered by the patent, even if the end result gives the exact same functionality.
>The concept/idea is not what is patented. The patent is (or should be) for the specific execution of the idea. Have you ever seen patents? They rarely cover the implementation details, or at most they're intentionally super vague about that, most of the time it's just the general idea on how the widget would work and what it does, but not how to implement it technically.
> They rarely cover the implementation details
if you can’t figure out how its implemented you’re looking at an invalid patent or an application
> they're intentionally super vague about that
yes that’s how claims work
> most of the time it's just the general idea on how the widget would work and what it does, but not how to implement it technically
you’re looking at an invalid patent or an application
Re: Nvidia sued for stealing trade secrets: blunder showed rival company's code
#128I seriously do not understand why any employee would steal their previous employers' code to use at a new employer. There's little-to-no personal upside, and only horrible downside if you get caught. I mean, this guy: > Moniruzzaman allegedly gave his personal email unauthorized access to Valeo's systems to steal "tens of thousands of files" and 6GB of source code shortly after that development... Valeo said its form…
I wonder if this would become more common with things like ChatGPT.
Let's say you've been working in place A, you show your code to an LLM service (like the dozen or so Copilot-like services) and tell them to refactor. And for the sake of argument, let's say the LLM uses your code and questions for its next training dataset.
A few years pass, then you go to work at Place B, and ask a question that happens to be related to the problem that Place A's code solved, and they give you Place A's code as is.
Re: Nvidia sued for stealing trade secrets: blunder showed rival company's code
#129I seriously do not understand why any employee would steal their previous employers' code to use at a new employer. There's little-to-no personal upside, and only horrible downside if you get caught. I mean, this guy: > Moniruzzaman allegedly gave his personal email unauthorized access to Valeo's systems to steal "tens of thousands of files" and 6GB of source code shortly after that development... Valeo said its form…
There is tremendous upside. You can look like a rockstar at the new company and propel yourself upwards with that momentum.
Re: Nvidia sued for stealing trade secrets: blunder showed rival company's code
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was a joke. I'm not a fan of "viral" licenses, and agree that, if a company doesn't want to abide by the license, they should not include them, but I am also not a fan of trying to force others to force others, to force others, etc., ad nauseam . I tend to use MIT, which isn't always everyone's cup of tea, but means that you can use my code, and it would be nice to be credited, but I won't cry myself to sleep, if…
The MIT license requires giving credit. The difference between MIT and GPL is that GPL requires sharing the modified source code and licensing it the same.
Yeaaahhh... I'm not going to argue about this. It's basically "Religion and politics," in this crowd, and discussions don't end well.
I apologize for my joke.