5 ms·

If it turns out to be a huge case ($$$$$) then I can forsee Google owning part of Uber if not outright.

EthanHeilman 9y ago
Google at least at one point owned about 6-7% of the Uber[0]. They may still own that much. [0]: https://www.quora.com/What-percentage-of-Uber-does-Google-own https://www.quora.com/What-percentage-of-Uber-does-Google-ow...
wand3r 9y ago
Google will acquire them. They already own shares from a Google venture round
- user5994461 9y ago
  Who would want to acquire a company like that. They'd have to fire all the employees and management to get rid of the bad seed.
  - ceejayoz 9y ago
    The customer and driver network is probably substantially more valuable.
    - ghostly_s 9y ago
      Ha. Probably 70-80% of both customers and drivers are doing business with Lyft, simultaneously. That's the rub of "contract employees".
  - WillPostForFood 9y ago
    Why crap on the employees for the lousy behaviour of the execs? You think the average programmer or office manage or designer at Uber is at fault?
    - user5994461 9y ago
      The exec influence goes down to the employees. Expect most mid managers and the upper hierarchy to be modelled by the top. Then about the bottom employees. Think a minute about what employees are left in that kind of environment and the psychological baggage they might carry.
      - WillPostForFood 9y ago
        That's silly - it's like saying you guilty of being a citizen of the US under Trump.
        inlined 9y ago
        And about half of us are
        user5994461 9y ago
        You don't get to pick your president and you can't change it. However you pick your job and you can leave it anytime you want.
        ardivekar 9y ago
        Technically yes. Practically, no.
    - __jal 9y ago
      It isn't so much about crapping on the employees as recognizing reality. Nobody wants a piece of Uber for the office managers or designers.
  - wand3r 9y ago
    Why, someone just paid a lot of money to train Uber employees on Google technology
  - synaesthesisx 9y ago
    They can rebrand it as Goober afterwards though
giarc 9y ago
Problem is they did own part of Uber. They were (are?) invested in Uber.
hiddencost 9y ago
Nobody cares about damages; the real meat is whether or not there will be an injunction. Damages could foreseeably go into the $1 billion range; an injunction would cost uber at least an order of magnitude more than that.
- rabidonrails 9y ago
  True, but my understanding is that an injunction in cases like this is very hard to achieve.
- valuearb 9y ago
  An injunction against what? Designing and building autonomous cars? An injunction like that might save Uber billions of dollars. I've never bought the idea they needed their own autonomous cars. Someday someone (very likely multiple someones unless our crazy patent system interferes) will build viable autonomous cars and Uber can just buy from them. Their ultimate success will always be based on their brand and how well they provide their service. Until the last 6 months they did an amazing job at both, they had their apps on many times more phones than any competitor, and their app works amazingly well. Now they've tarnished their brand and might be losing market share, well before the market is completely built out. that's what they should be focusing on.
  - netsharc 9y ago
    Some commenter on Reddit/here said that Uber doesn't have a way to profitability, self-driving is just to keep the investor money flowing in. But the future of cars is really like servers, not ownership, but as a service, you'll just use an app to hail a self-driving car to take you anywhere. Whoever can sell their self-driving tech to car manufacturers will win, Uber probably wants to be the infrastructure that the car companies use to manage their CaaS, and if they win the self-driving first-to-market race, they can bundle their existing fleet management service as a bundle with the tech. But if someone else wins the self-driving tech, a car manufacturer can buy that, and either self-develop their own fleet management or buy from someone else (it's a lot simpler than self-driving tech, obviously).

Google at least at one point owned about 6-7% of the Uber[0]. They may still own that much. [0]: https://www.quora.com/What-percentage-of-Uber-does-Google-own https://www.quora.com/What-percentage-of-Uber-does-Google-ow...

wand3r 9y ago

Google will acquire them. They already own shares from a Google venture round

user5994461 9y ago
Who would want to acquire a company like that. They'd have to fire all the employees and management to get rid of the bad seed.
- ceejayoz 9y ago
  The customer and driver network is probably substantially more valuable.
  - ghostly_s 9y ago
    Ha. Probably 70-80% of both customers and drivers are doing business with Lyft, simultaneously. That's the rub of "contract employees".
- WillPostForFood 9y ago
  Why crap on the employees for the lousy behaviour of the execs? You think the average programmer or office manage or designer at Uber is at fault?
  - user5994461 9y ago
    The exec influence goes down to the employees. Expect most mid managers and the upper hierarchy to be modelled by the top. Then about the bottom employees. Think a minute about what employees are left in that kind of environment and the psychological baggage they might carry.
    - WillPostForFood 9y ago
      That's silly - it's like saying you guilty of being a citizen of the US under Trump.
      - inlined 9y ago
        And about half of us are
        user5994461 9y ago
        You don't get to pick your president and you can't change it. However you pick your job and you can leave it anytime you want.
        ardivekar 9y ago
        Technically yes. Practically, no.
  - __jal 9y ago
    It isn't so much about crapping on the employees as recognizing reality. Nobody wants a piece of Uber for the office managers or designers.
- wand3r 9y ago
  Why, someone just paid a lot of money to train Uber employees on Google technology
- synaesthesisx 9y ago
  They can rebrand it as Goober afterwards though

giarc 9y ago

Problem is they did own part of Uber. They were (are?) invested in Uber.

hiddencost 9y ago

Nobody cares about damages; the real meat is whether or not there will be an injunction. Damages could foreseeably go into the $1 billion range; an injunction would cost uber at least an order of magnitude more than that.

rabidonrails 9y ago
True, but my understanding is that an injunction in cases like this is very hard to achieve.
valuearb 9y ago
An injunction against what? Designing and building autonomous cars? An injunction like that might save Uber billions of dollars. I've never bought the idea they needed their own autonomous cars. Someday someone (very likely multiple someones unless our crazy patent system interferes) will build viable autonomous cars and Uber can just buy from them. Their ultimate success will always be based on their brand and how well they provide their service. Until the last 6 months they did an amazing job at both, they had their apps on many times more phones than any competitor, and their app works amazingly well. Now they've tarnished their brand and might be losing market share, well before the market is completely built out. that's what they should be focusing on.
- netsharc 9y ago
  Some commenter on Reddit/here said that Uber doesn't have a way to profitability, self-driving is just to keep the investor money flowing in. But the future of cars is really like servers, not ownership, but as a service, you'll just use an app to hail a self-driving car to take you anywhere. Whoever can sell their self-driving tech to car manufacturers will win, Uber probably wants to be the infrastructure that the car companies use to manage their CaaS, and if they win the self-driving first-to-market race, they can bundle their existing fleet management service as a bundle with the tech. But if someone else wins the self-driving tech, a car manufacturer can buy that, and either self-develop their own fleet management or buy from someone else (it's a lot simpler than self-driving tech, obviously).