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

Anthony Levandowski ordered to pay $179M to Google

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–246 of 246 posts

Re: Anthony Levandowski ordered to pay $179M to Google

#241

Post by jjeaff »

freepor wrote: post #110
jjeaff wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most states have a homestead exemption. But most states also have a limit on the value of that homestead. Sure, you shouldn't lose your reasonable family home over debt. But that doesn't mean people like OJ Simpson should be able to keep their multi million dollar estates even though they have filed for bankruptcy.

California’s homestead exemption is $75,000, which won’t even get you a parking spot in San Francisco.

It's a little more complicated than that and it's also $100k for married couples and goes up if you are elderly.

In order for a creditor to take a lien on your home after a bankruptcy proceeding in CA, I believe they need to prove that after a Sheriff's sale (which generally does not get market value), there will be more than the exemption limit left over after all the mortgage and taxes and fees are paid.

If they can't then they won't be able to levy your home and force a sale. So in a worst case scenario, you would need to take out an additional mortgage or heloc on the available equity in your home to bring the total available equity under the exemption limit ($75k+) and then pay that money towards the bankruptcy debt.

So basically what is happening, is you get to keep your home, but you are forfeiting all you home owner's equity that exceeds the exemption limit.

Re: Anthony Levandowski ordered to pay $179M to Google

#242

Post by joshuamorton »

zsandwich wrote: post #230

What the case was about is employee mobility, competition, and the onerous employee agreements with secretive and punitive arbitration clauses that Big Tech forces their employees to sign. So yes, Anthony may have lost his case but that’s because all employees - especially high prized ones like him - are forced into these agreements and play on an uneven playing field. Thankfully there have been recent improvements i…

What?

This has nothing to do with arbitration. Levandowski was sued for IP theft (and faces criminal charges for the same)

Re: Anthony Levandowski ordered to pay $179M to Google

#243

Post by engineeringwoke »

MrSandman wrote: post #227
engineeringwoke wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He should've gone to jail, like people are supposed to when they commit fraud.

Fraud? What? This trial hasn’t even gone to court. You’re making blanket statements about someone’s life based on accusations from a Big Tech company and their PR teams. This person has been accused -not convicted and is going bankrupt because he is fighting Google. I know this is a Bay Area forum - half of you probably work for Google but give me a break. They steal personal information from everyone who uses their…

Ah, the American "ooga booga" defense. You can never really know anything, since everything is speculation! This is just lawyer-speak!

There is moral hazard written all over this, and you are either too naive to see it or are trying to defend the stacked kangaroo courts of American criminal proceedings for employees of large multinational corporations.

We know that the guy stole proprietary technology and maybe there might have been intentions to use it by Uber, BUT there's no proof tying it to Uber (of course). As always. These guys aren't dumb enough to make the mistakes that Microsoft made in the 90's.

Re: Anthony Levandowski ordered to pay $179M to Google

#244

Post by dodobirdlord »

tyingq wrote: post #185
dodobirdlord wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but I'm sure some prosecutor took a look at it and decided it wasn't worthwhile. People get killed in accidents all the time, and frequently nobody gets charged with anything. A person being killed in a car accident while jaywalking at night because the driver wasn't paying attention particularly well is a story as old as cars, and usually doesn't result in jail time. Turns out, people are legally allowed to dr…

"some prosecutor took a look at it and decided it wasn't worthwhile" Probably a prosecutor that works for some local government that could be also be liable for letting Uber operate that car in their jurisdiction. I imagine that discussion happened.

I doubt it, Arizona legalized self-driving cars at the state level.

Re: Anthony Levandowski ordered to pay $179M to Google

#245

Post by tyingq »

dodobirdlord wrote: post #244
tyingq wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"some prosecutor took a look at it and decided it wasn't worthwhile" Probably a prosecutor that works for some local government that could be also be liable for letting Uber operate that car in their jurisdiction. I imagine that discussion happened.

I doubt it, Arizona legalized self-driving cars at the state level.

"The state and city of Tempe were hit with a lawsuit Monday over their alleged negligence in the fatal crash between a self-driving Uber and a pedestrian a year ago."

https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/tempe/2019/03/19/...

Re: Anthony Levandowski ordered to pay $179M to Google

#246

Post by agoodthrowaway »

eigenvalue wrote: post #220
agoodthrowaway wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not sure I would call him a brilliant engineer if he had to steal designs from Google.

It was his team at Google that made the designs in the first place...

Meh. What commercial product has the guy ever released? I’ve been involved in many and I can tell you that with each one of them I knew exactly what I would do differently the next time. I didn’t need an old design because I knew what we needed to do without having to refer to the old design. If this guy was so brilliant he wouldn’t have stolen because he’d have known how to make the design better.

Rather I think he stole the designs for expediency out of greed.

Post reply on HN