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

251–260 of 358 posts

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

#251

Post by life_on_mars2 »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #245
life_on_mars wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So from what I understand, Google is litigating this in public, but their lawyers, such as Mr. Verhoeven, are redacting everything on their side they don't want public. This makes it sound like Google is doing this in public mainly to hurt Uber as much as possible in the court of public opinion. Am I wrong in interpreting Google's actions this way? Sounds like this and many other conflicts Google had with Mr. Lewando…

A vendetta against Mr. Levandowski? Google paid him $120 million , and he then took that same technology for another multi hundred million dollar payday from Uber. Mr. Levandowski's avarice is basically something I can't really comprehend.

I can't find the article that I read that talked about Mr Levandowski's experience prior to Google and while at Google, but the impression I got wasn't that he left out of avarice, but because Google was too bureaucratic for his taste. His entire career looks like someone eager to build the future today, and it sounds like Google failed to be an enabler of what he wants to build. The more I read about Uber, the more I get the impression that it's the best place to work today if you actually want to build the future fast.

Plus, getting a second big payday may not have even mattered to him, but it would have mattered to all the other Otto employees.

Everyone here is quick to assume malice when it might just be incompetence of one form or another.

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

#252

Post by life_on_mars2 »

HaloZero wrote: post #69
radlad wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except this wasn't found on Levandowski's machine (the guy who sold Octo.)

This was found on another person's laptop who helped found Otto though.

If enough engineers leave company A and join company B and all are working in the same field, I would expect at least some of those employees to have documents from their previous employer, even if only accidentally.

The fact that they've only found one document and only on the personal laptop of a single employee seems to suggest that they actually did a good job in due diligence.

Does anyone know how many former Waymo engineers now work at Uber?

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

#253

Post by tdb7893 »

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!

They have evidence that he stole documents from a competitor. Asking him to prove he doesn't have any of those documents or be fired seems perfectly reasonable.

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

#254

Post by matt4077 »

life_on_mars wrote: post #247
nl wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Uber is in no position to deny it, only Lewandowsky could. And he can't deny it, because then he could no longer invoke his right to remain silent. > So he should give up his 5th amendment right to fend off an accusation? I don't think so, that doesn't sound like justice to me. That's how the 5th amendment works. It gives you the right to avoid self-incrimination, but if you invoke that right and there is other ev…

Has this other evidence even been presented yet? edit: given that even a simple question was downvoted, I can only conclude that there are likely a lot of Google employees downvoting anything that doesn't support Google's side in this dispute.

I downvoted you because–considering your strong opinions–it seems unlikely that this is a question asked in good faith. And even if, it is answered both in the article, as well as pretty much implied in the headline.

GOOG-ACCOUNTING-REF:3FX/ASTRO/15/TURFWAR/PROJECTSOROS

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

#255

Post by Haydos585x2 »

clubm8 wrote: post #239

I'm curious how Uber (a private company) got access to someone's personal laptop. If my employer demanded access to my personal machine I'd tell them to pound sand.

Someone else in this thread links to sources but it looks like in civil cases things can be subponead in a similar way to the criminal system.

Edit: Found it, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14046529

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

#256

Post by dlgeek »

sova wrote: post #221
akiselev wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For those who don't recognize the name, this is the same judge that learned some Java for the Oracle v. Google case (and has an undergrad degree in mathematics). Every time I read his name I know it's going to be a fun ride and the lawyers will not be able to get away with anywhere near as much shenanigans as they usually do. Although his ruling regarding API copyright in the Google case was overturned, he has a real…

Dude he learned Java for a court case? My respect for this man grows immense. What a G. I wish more people were like this "I need some more domain-knowledge to understand what's at stake? no problem, let me do some learning." Excellent attitude.

Continue to be impressed: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3524990/Gov-Uscou... https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3524989/d99f25c8-...

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

#257

Post by gtirloni »

woodandsteel wrote: post #242

What Google really wants is to prove that Uber is using the technology in the product it is developing. So the question is how Google will go about trying to prove that, and what Uber would need to do to prove it is not.

The case will proceed to expert witnesses in time. The 14,000 documents seem to be Uber's smallest problem in this case.

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

#258

Post by matt4077 »

life_on_mars wrote: post #246
mandevil wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>So he should give up his 5th amendment right to fend off an accusation? I don't think so, that doesn't sound like justice to me. Note that this is really complicated because this is a civil trial, with a different standard of guilt (preponderance vs. beyond a reasonable doubt), and where invoking the 5th Amendment can definitely be held against you. If this were a criminal trial- and he did it correctly- invoking th…

It's reasonable for it to be used against Mr Lewandowsky, but is it reasonable to use it against his employer? Many people have their opinion on whether Uber is evil or not, but any employer that forces you to give up a right that Constitution affords you if you're potentially facing criminal charges sounds evil to me. If the court wants him to testify in a civil case instead of asserting his 5th amendment right, the…

This is addressed plenty of times in this thread.

Futher, specific to your question: the court doesn't care one way or another. They'll take his testimony if he wants to give it, and they'll have it even easier to make a decision without. A civil court is also unlikely to be in a position to grant any immunity.

Neither google nor the court care about the conflicts of interest on the defendants' side. I'd even agree with you that at-will employment is evil, and legitimately pleading the 5th shouldn't be enough to fire someone. But specifically in this case, Lewandowsky could be fired even if he were employed by the French government – he could then sue himself, and the findings of the google/uber trial would probably determine his claim of wrongful dismissal.

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

#259

Post by biot »

ridgeguy wrote: post #249
biot wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Technically, arson is burning down someone else's property. It's not a criminal offence to burn down a house you own, though it is likely a non-criminal fire code violation.

I don't think that's right. For example, in the California Penal Code, "A person is guilty of arson when he or she willfully and maliciously sets fire to or burns or causes to be burned or who aids, counsels, or procures the burning of, any structure, forest land, or property." [1] The incendiary's ownership or not of the property doesn't matter. [1] https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio... .

From your link:

  For purposes of this paragraph, arson of property does
  not include one burning or causing to be burned his or
  her own personal property unless there is an intent to
  defraud or there is injury to another person or another
  person’s structure, forest land, or property.

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

#260

Post by matt4077 »

dangoldin wrote: post #236
kupiakos wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He wanted to bring purity to the US justice system.

I wish his behavior led to some side effects on the justice system.

The courts are actually pretty first-class. Take a look at the transcript posted elsewhere in this thread for a reference to the transparency of the system, and how this judge is defending it. Supreme Court cases also make for pretty fun reading sometimes, and there's no denying that judges tend to be extremely smart and conscientious.
Post reply on HN