Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Uber finds one allegedly stolen Waymo file on an employee’s personal device

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 358 posts

Re: Uber finds one allegedly stolen Waymo file on an employee’s personal device

#201

Post by kelnos »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #125
empath75 wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't really a gray area. He stole a bunch of documents on the way out, founded a new company based on IP he didn't own, and then sold it to another company. (assuming google's allegations are true)

I believe that fowlerpower's point is that you should not assume that Google's allegations are true - at least not until they are proven.

Well, the evidence that Google has gathered to suggest that Levandowski did copy the documents and then tried to cover his tracks is pretty persuasive, so it might be safe to assume that part of it is true.

However, whether or not he used those documents in an inappropriate manner in Otto or Uber is still up for debate.

Re: Uber finds one allegedly stolen Waymo file on an employee’s personal device

#202

Post by [deleted] »

debaserab2 wrote: post #191
chadcmulligan wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed he's the judge Judy of tech IP trials. The java one was the first I'd ever bothered following on a regular basis, very entertaining.

Judge Judy isn't even an actual judge, so I certainly hope he isn't the judge judy of tech IP trials.

[deleted]

Re: Uber finds one allegedly stolen Waymo file on an employee’s personal device

#203

Post by GeneralMayhem »

ekidd wrote: post #53
YCode wrote: post #3

Offhand, this kind of sounds like a parent asking their teenager to go and search their own room for drugs. "Nah, I didn't find anything. I found this plastic bag that looks like it mighta had something in it, but I'm pretty sure my friend left it here and it was empty when he brought it." "Okay son, go search again."

> Offhand, this kind of sounds like a parent asking their teenager to go and search their own room for drugs. I have expressed this attitude to corporate lawyers before, and asked them how the system deals with bad actors. Basically, if a judge catches you lying during discovery, they can issue a default judgement against you and impose very serious additional damages. For example: http://newenglandinhouse.com/2015/0…

For an example of a sufficiently annoyed judge using all the sanctions available, see what Judge Otis Wright did to Prenda Law: https://www.popehat.com/tag/prenda-law/ (especially https://www.popehat.com/2013/03/06/what-prenda-law-is-facing...).

Re: Uber finds one allegedly stolen Waymo file on an employee’s personal device

#204

Post by fowlerpower »

dllthomas wrote: post #63
throwaway729 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The outcome of this will teach us all very valuable lessons. Lesson #1: Don't steal. > I can't be the only one who is a little paranoid that if I start my own shit I'll be sued or that I may even be sued for some of the side projects I'm working on even though I've never taken any code or resources from my company. Lesson #2: If someone accuses you of theft, deny it instead of pleading the fifth. Assuming their acc…

Your Lesson #2 is wrong. If someone accuses you of theft listen to your lawyer , whether you are innocent or guilty.

Exactly. I agree with you, you should always lawyer up and never say anything your lawyer does not advise.

Re: Uber finds one allegedly stolen Waymo file on an employee’s personal device

#205

Post by kelnos »

DannyBee wrote: post #157

A lot of people seem confused by the idea that a party can request personal documents someone else has. Just like in criminal land, civil land has subpoenas. Parties can issue subpoenas for most things to other parties. In federal court, civil subpoenas are covered by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure rule 45. https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_45 Outside of the exceptions listed, yes, you would be required t…

I think also in this case it's a matter of Uber telling its employees, "hey, if you have any of this stuff on your personal laptops, you'd better give it to us" (with the perhaps-implicit "or we might fire you" on the end of it). Two of the employees are playing ball, but Levandowski has clammed up (and Uber, to the judge's amusement, is allowing him to do that without repercussions).

Re: Uber finds one allegedly stolen Waymo file on an employee’s personal device

#206

Post by jimmywanger »

08-15 wrote: post #119
bradleyjg wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not really the issue. The issue is whether the judge is going to impute Levandowski's failure to cooperate to Uber. From the transcript: MR. GONZÁLEZ (Uber's lawyer): So, Your Honor, first of all, we have searched and we are in the process of searching all of our computers for the sorts of information that you referred to. And if we find those documents, we intend to produce those. In addition, Your Honor, we…

> Uber has the authority to say to its employees, "If you have anything at home you bring it in here Wait, what? In the opinion of the court, a company has the authority to demand that their employee hands over the contents of his personal computer? That doesn't sound right... please, somebody tell me the US judicial system isn't that retarded!

It's part of the standard employment contract, as a nuclear option that's only invoked in cases like this.

Basically, if the employee refuses and the company fires the employee, the company can shield itself from liability by cutting ties with the employee and telling the court that they had no idea what the employee was up to and didn't condone it at all.

Re: Uber finds one allegedly stolen Waymo file on an employee’s personal device

#207

Post by mcbits »

throwaway729 wrote: post #111
dragonwriter wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But I have a hard time imagining a specific scenario where you're accused of IP theft and a lawyer can't find a way to say "my client is not guilty of IP theft" without compromising their client. Okay, how about where they actually physically have the documents that are the subject of the case, cooperating with discovery would reveal them, but they didn't actually use them in the new job or take them with intent, e…

My assumption is that intentionally copying IP onto a personal device and removing that device from the office -- regardless of any actual intent to use that data -- is still theft. Which would make the former employer's claims truthful. It's super unclear to me how you would accidentally retain a copy digital documents...? Like I said, it's hard to imagine this scenario actually happening. But for good measure: Less…

I actually did something like this long ago (pre-2000) - emailed a set of detailed and very confidential sales spreadsheets to my personal email. It wasn't "theft" (and AFAIK nobody even noticed). It was so I could convert the spreadsheets to a proper Access database on my own time, since that's not what I was paid to do but it made my job a lot easier.

I would probably have been in a world of shit if anything came of it, though.

Re: Uber finds one allegedly stolen Waymo file on an employee’s personal device

#209

Post by tempestn »

Animats wrote: post #62

Judge Alsup: "If your guy is involved in criminal activity and has to have criminal lawyers of the caliber of these two gentlemen, who are the best, well, okay they got the best. But it’s a problem I can’t solve for you. And if you think I’m going to cut you some slack because you’re looking at—your guy is looking at jail time, no. They [Waymo] are going to get the benefit of their record. And if you don’t deny it—if…

As an aside, it's striking how poorly someone can come off when their conversational speech is quoted verbatim. A lot of cutting and some paraphrasing goes on when publishing interviews to avoid this. Doesn't appear to be an issue in this discussion, but if a clearly intelligent judge can come off as somewhat dithering on reading a transcript, it's a good reminder to give others the benefit of the doubt when they're quoted verbatim.*

*I'm experiencing a bit of Baader Meinhof here. Just today I learned of something called the conversational Trump Trench. Basically the idea is that these days almost any conversation will end up sliding into being about Trump, or being perceived to be about Trump. So I feel the need to say I didn't have him in mind when I started writing this, and I don't personally support Trump. But even when reading Trump quotes, probably still worth keeping this in mind.

Re: Uber finds one allegedly stolen Waymo file on an employee’s personal device

#210

Post by caf »

milesrout wrote: post #165
stanleydrew wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's great if you're the defendant...

It's good for everyone that the police can't skirt around the rules of discovery and present 'last minute evidence' that denies peoples' right to a free trial, yes.

The context here is civil cases (I think the GP means "respondent" rather than "defendant"?)
Post reply on HN