Is there any reason not to be suspicious that Levandowski will just work on them unofficially?
There's no reason to believe that Levandowski is an irreplaceable engineer, is there?
Yes, but he seems to be in irreplaceable social engineer.
Uber’s Anthony Levandowski out as Advanced Technologies lead amid legal fight
11–20 of 224 posts
Re: Uber’s Anthony Levandowski out as Advanced Technologies lead amid legal fight
#12Is there any reason not to be suspicious that Levandowski will just work on them unofficially?
Presumption of innocence. You have to assume that the people are innocent until they are proven guilty. If you fired Levandowski and win the case, then he sues. If you leave him in place and you're found guilty, there are extra damages because you were "notified" and you still didn't stop his work. So you move him off to the side, wait for the trial to resolve. And then figure out what to do with him, which will be e…
Isn't this a civil case, i.e., nobody is charging either Levandowski or Uber with a crime?
And isn't Uber a) not a court of law, and therefore not obligated to presume innocence, and b) an at-will employer, who can terminate Levandowski merely for making life hard for them, whether or not he was responsible?
Re: Uber’s Anthony Levandowski out as Advanced Technologies lead amid legal fight
#13Is there any reason not to be suspicious that Levandowski will just work on them unofficially?
Presumption of innocence. You have to assume that the people are innocent until they are proven guilty. If you fired Levandowski and win the case, then he sues. If you leave him in place and you're found guilty, there are extra damages because you were "notified" and you still didn't stop his work. So you move him off to the side, wait for the trial to resolve. And then figure out what to do with him, which will be e…
> You have to assume that the people are innocent until they are proven guilty.
You only have to do that when you are the trier of fact (jury in a jury trial, judge in a bench trial) in a criminal prosecution.
Outside of that, the rules are different.
> If you fired Levandowski and win the case, then he sues.
And loses, because at-will employment, and being suspected, even wrongly, of civil wrongdoing creating liability for your employer is not a protected class.
Re: Uber’s Anthony Levandowski out as Advanced Technologies lead amid legal fight
#14That's just Uber trying avoid having their self-driving car department shut-down. But it could definitely still happen. Maybe Uber should apply to Google's 'PatentShield' program ;)
Maybe Uber has realized that this guy is toxic and can't be trusted handling "their" tech? If he spent a decade stealing Google's tech, are they willing to risk him treating Uber the same way? Especially since Uber's epic level of sliminess would make it even easier for Levandowski to rationalize theft.
Maybe Google should hire him back.
Re: Uber’s Anthony Levandowski out as Advanced Technologies lead amid legal fight
#15That's just Uber trying avoid having their self-driving car department shut-down. But it could definitely still happen. Maybe Uber should apply to Google's 'PatentShield' program ;)
Maybe Uber has realized that this guy is toxic and can't be trusted handling "their" tech? If he spent a decade stealing Google's tech, are they willing to risk him treating Uber the same way? Especially since Uber's epic level of sliminess would make it even easier for Levandowski to rationalize theft.
Some sleazebag at Uber hired him exactly for that reason. Levandowski got caught. The question is how deep does this trail go?
Re: Uber’s Anthony Levandowski out as Advanced Technologies lead amid legal fight
#16That's just Uber trying avoid having their self-driving car department shut-down. But it could definitely still happen. Maybe Uber should apply to Google's 'PatentShield' program ;)
That would be hilarious (the Patentshield application). It is also rare to have one of these disputes happening with such wide visibility. And reading the coverage so far it sounds like Levandowski chose to interpret the meaning of his employment agreement with Google much more charitably than Google does (which is somewhat expected on Google's part). I went back and looked at mine from 2006 (which was the year earli…
Consider Google's investment in Uber! "The $258 million is an 86 percent chunk of Google Ventures’ $300 million dollar a year fund, and it’s unclear whether the firm will continue to make such sizable investments." - https://techcrunch.com/2013/08/22/google-ventures-puts-258m-...
Re: Uber’s Anthony Levandowski out as Advanced Technologies lead amid legal fight
#17Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably not going to matter either way - Google's got them dead to rights, will likely win a complete injunction against the program...
That and Uber pissed off the wrong people by stealing Levandowski after Google had bought his company. And that after Google had invested in Uber.
No Levandowski pissed off the wrong people by stealing core technology from Google. Stealing employees is OK. Technology is not. It is the law.
Re: Uber’s Anthony Levandowski out as Advanced Technologies lead amid legal fight
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe Uber has realized that this guy is toxic and can't be trusted handling "their" tech? If he spent a decade stealing Google's tech, are they willing to risk him treating Uber the same way? Especially since Uber's epic level of sliminess would make it even easier for Levandowski to rationalize theft.
Some sleazebag at Uber hired him exactly for that reason. Levandowski got caught. The question is how deep does this trail go?
That sleazebag would be Kalanick then, given the evidence of their romantic after dinner walks.
'Kalanick began courting Levandowski this spring, broaching the possibility of an acquisition during a series of 10-mile night walks from the Soma neighborhood where Uber is also headquartered to the Golden Gate Bridge. The two men would leave their offices separately—to avoid being seen by employees, the press, or competitors. They’d grab takeout food, then rendezvous near the city’s Ferry Building. Levandowski says he saw a union as a way to bring the company’s trucks to market faster.'
How are those trucks coming along, haha.
Re: Uber’s Anthony Levandowski out as Advanced Technologies lead amid legal fight
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
Presumption of innocence. You have to assume that the people are innocent until they are proven guilty. If you fired Levandowski and win the case, then he sues. If you leave him in place and you're found guilty, there are extra damages because you were "notified" and you still didn't stop his work. So you move him off to the side, wait for the trial to resolve. And then figure out what to do with him, which will be e…
Isn't this a civil case, i.e., nobody is charging either Levandowski or Uber with a crime? And isn't Uber a) not a court of law, and therefore not obligated to presume innocence, and b) an at-will employer, who can terminate Levandowski merely for making life hard for them, whether or not he was responsible?
Yes it is a civil case, and it is a valid point about the lack of a criminal complaint. My explanation is inadequate.
The burden of proof in a theft of trade secrets argument is on the plaintiff[1,2]. Google needs to prove Levandowski stole trade secrets, it does not require Uber to prove that he didn't.
I am also presuming that Uber has an employment contract with Levandowski which includes earn outs as part of the Otto acquisition. This is common practice. And if my presumption is correct, he is not an 'at will' employee, there are specific guidelines around termination and the responsibilities of each party should they decide to separate. It is entirely possible that if they were to ask him to leave, and he had yet to be proven to have stolen secrets or misreprented his ownership of the IP he brought, Uber could conceivably owe him the balance of all earn outs immediately.
[1] "Illinois law applied to the case and Illinois has passed the Uniform Trade Secrets Act. This Uniform Act is the law in 46 of the 50 states. To prevail on a trade secrets claim under the Act, a plaintiff must prove that: (1) it has information qualifying as a trade secret; (2) at least one of its trade secrets has been misappropriated; and (3) the defendant used that trade secret in their business activity or inevitably will." -- http://www.btlaw.com/files/Uploads/Documents/Publications/A%...
[2] https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.x....
Re: Uber’s Anthony Levandowski out as Advanced Technologies lead amid legal fight
#20Is there any reason not to be suspicious that Levandowski will just work on them unofficially?
There's no reason to believe that Levandowski is an irreplaceable engineer, is there?
He's one of the top experts in self driving technology, a motorcycle he and a team built in college is in the Smithsonian. I can see Uber wanting to keep him on unofficially.