Live data from Hacker News

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

techcrunch.com

1–10 of 358 posts

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

#2
'“To the extent Uber tries to excuse its noncompliance on the grounds that Mr. Levandowski has invoked the Fifth Amendment and refused to provide Uber with documents or assistance, Waymo notes that Mr. Levandowski remains — to this day — an Uber executive and in charge of its self-driving car program. Uber has ratified Mr. Levandowski’s behavior and is liable for it,” Waymo attorney Charles K. Verhoeven wrote in a letter to the court (emphasis his).'

Ouch.

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

#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."

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

#7
post #2

'“To the extent Uber tries to excuse its noncompliance on the grounds that Mr. Levandowski has invoked the Fifth Amendment and refused to provide Uber with documents or assistance, Waymo notes that Mr. Levandowski remains — to this day — an Uber executive and in charge of its self-driving car program. Uber has ratified Mr. Levandowski’s behavior and is liable for it,” Waymo attorney Charles K. Verhoeven wrote in a le…

No, that's a completely non-substantiative quote from an attorney for one side that contains the implicit assumption that Uber really does have the documents and is actively committing crimes in discovery to prevent the discovery from working. Not only is it not an unbiased source, it's basically a source being paid to be biased. Which is fine; I am generally down with the philosophy of adversarial justice. But you shouldn't read much of anything at all into that quote.

For those of us on the outside, while we are justified in considering that a possible hypothesis, we are also justified in looking at the facts and considering that it may indeed be the case that these documents were never given to Uber. I for one have no trouble believing that the documents were downloaded by an individual but that they were never given to Uber, as I rather suspect "keeping more than one really ought from one's previous job but never raising to the level of actually giving that stuff to one's next employer" is really quite common.

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

#8
post #7
post #2

'“To the extent Uber tries to excuse its noncompliance on the grounds that Mr. Levandowski has invoked the Fifth Amendment and refused to provide Uber with documents or assistance, Waymo notes that Mr. Levandowski remains — to this day — an Uber executive and in charge of its self-driving car program. Uber has ratified Mr. Levandowski’s behavior and is liable for it,” Waymo attorney Charles K. Verhoeven wrote in a le…

No, that's a completely non-substantiative quote from an attorney for one side that contains the implicit assumption that Uber really does have the documents and is actively committing crimes in discovery to prevent the discovery from working. Not only is it not an unbiased source, it's basically a source being paid to be biased. Which is fine; I am generally down with the philosophy of adversarial justice. But you s…

>...it may indeed be the case that these documents were never given to Uber.

Then they should have their legal team pilloried and set ablaze for advising them to be this cagey.

Post reply on HN