33 ms·
Waymo’s lawsuit against Uber is going to trial, judge rules
- p49k 9y ago"It is unfortunate that Waymo will be permitted to avoid abiding by the arbitration promise it requires its employees to make." The idea of forcing people into arbitration has crept into every agreement and contract that Americans enter, and it's out of control. Congress needs to pass a law forbidding contracts from forcing individuals into arbitration.
- macspoofing 9y ago>Congress needs to pass a law forbidding contracts from forcing individuals into arbitration. Hold on there. Let's not dismiss it out of hand - bypassing the court system and getting things resolved quickly has benefits. And I suspect the arbitration system is itself a response to some judicial excesses and the insane American lawsuit-happy culture. I'm not saying there aren't problems, and the judicial system should be there, but it's not bad if people solve their own problems without government involvement.
- beagle3 9y agoA faster alternative to courts is a good idea. However, the existing arbitration system is biased exceptionally heavy towards repeat customers (and that comes in addition to inherent bias of reality towards deeper pockets). Unlike a judge, an arbiter who finds against a company will not get their repeat business; that's an inherent conflict of interest.
- TillE 9y agoWhen both parties agree to take a specific dispute to arbitration, great. Writing it into lopsided contracts is abusive bullshit though.
- Obi_Juan_Kenobi 9y agoArbitration must remain voluntary, as your right to a proper court must not be violated.
- macspoofing 9y agoAgain, I'm not sure about that. Speaking in generalities, why can't two parties enter into binding arbitration? For example, divorce arbitration can be significantly cheaper than going through the court system but it only works if it's binding otherwise one unsatisfied party can simply ignore the ruling.
- wayn3 9y agothey first need to forbid people to sue for whatever they feel like, especially when its intentionally bullshit, just to drive the other party into bankruptcy.
- erikpukinskis 9y agoI believe it's already illegal to knowingly file a spurious lawsuit.
- AnimalMuppet 9y agoSure. But proving it to the point that you can make the other party pay for it, without going bankrupt yourself, is not easy.
- erikpukinskis 9y agoNo one claimed it was. It's not easy to prove you were raped either and the majority of people don't seem to have any problem with that. We have work to do, but the problem doesn't seem to be the law itself.
- wayn3 9y agoits not your job to prove you were raped. its the prosecutions job to do that. the majority of people has a problem with rape going unpunished. but criminal justice is a bit fickle, because you cant just make it easier to convict people without having the false conviction rate shoot through the roof. and in a free society, youd rather err a bit on the side of letting some people who did commit crimes go.
- iplaw 9y agoBinding arbitration has its place. Look at the binding arbitration decision between Qualcomm and Blackberry, which is resulting in Blackberry receiving an $815,000,000 refund from Qualcomm after a royalty dispute involving licensed standard essential patents. Because it was binding arbitration and not traditional court proceedings, this judgment is not appealable. This compressed what would have been a 10-year drawn out and extremely costly process into five days. That's it! There are more arguments against binding arbitration when it's an individual against a conglomerate - you get a biased arbitrator and you're sunk with no means of redress.
- kyrra 9y ago0) You can appeal arbitration awards within the arbitration company[0]. 1) You can appeal arbitration rulings to the court system for a subset of situations (like misconduct or fraud by the arbiters)[1]. [0] http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:VjU7-9v2qHoJ:www.law360.com/articles/614689/yes-you-can-appeal-an-arbitration-award+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:VjU7-9v... [1] https://apps.americanbar.org/litigation/committees/adr/articles/summer2014-0914-appealing-arbitration-decisions-practice-tips-young-lawyers.html https://apps.americanbar.org/litigation/committees/adr/artic...
- _delirium 9y ago> Congress needs to pass a law forbidding contracts from forcing individuals into arbitration. Congress, unfortunately, passed almost exactly the opposite law. The American courts traditionally disfavored binding arbitration, viewing it as a kind of illegitimate private court usurping the power of the proper courts. The Federal Arbitration Act (1925) overturned that norm with regard to federal-court cases, and the Supreme Court controversially ruled in 1984 [1] that the FAA preempted state anti-arbitration laws as well, which is when binding arbitration really began to take off. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southland_Corp._v._Keating https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southland_Corp._v._Keating
- y_u_no_rust 9y agofinally some good news Uber is managed by criminals
- meddlepal 9y agoUber should probably be shitting it's pants right about now. Google would have to really bungle this to not get a jury to agree Uber has been acting very shady.
- Alex3917 9y agoGoogle doesn't have to convince a jury of anything to win. All they need to do is hold up Uber's next funding round for long enough to force them to drop out of a few markets.
- mattnewton 9y agoYeah, when you put it that way you realize how screwed the system is for the little guy. I am no fan of Uber's, and if they did what Waymo alleges they should be packing up shop, but I imagine it can be brutal for startups having that extra risk associated with your brand.
- notatoad 9y agoI'm not sure "screwed for the little guy" is really the right way to look at this. If Uber weren't so dependent on VC to subsidize their growth, delaying a funding round wouldn't be quite so disastrous. It's entirely possible to be the little guy without putting yourself in the situation that Uber has gotten themselves into.
- bkkssnn 9y agoUber is the "Little guy" ?
- gtsteve 9y agoI think they are talking about any situation where a smaller business is sued by a larger one; the larger party doesn't have to be right, they just need to have enough funds to stalemate the smaller party until they get driven out of business.
- 9y ago
- aresant 9y agoThis is a huge precursor to the real blow: "The decision hints that Alsup’s pending decision on a preliminary injunction might not be favorable to Uber. . . it could effectively halt Uber’s self driving development plans entirely while the trial plays out." In context of Travis' view "What would happen if we weren't a part of that future? If we weren't part of the autonomy thing? Then the future passes us by basically, in a very expeditious and efficient way," he said." (1) (1) https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/travis-kalanick-interview-on-self-driving-cars-future-driver-jobs-2016-8 https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/travis-...
- cheeze 9y agoNon AMP version of your link: http://www.businessinsider.com/travis-kalanick-interview-on-self-driving-cars-future-driver-jobs-2016-8 http://www.businessinsider.com/travis-kalanick-interview-on-...
- jameskegel 9y agoThank you
- sjg007 9y agoMaybe. People still need an income. That can keep uber drivers around for a bit. Also self driving cars may take 10-15 years to actuate reliably.
- zitterbewegung 9y agoSo while that happens Lyft could eat their lunch (and Waymo could help them).
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- sjg007 9y agoI thought google invested in uber..?
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- eridius 9y agoBuried at the end of the article: > Update: Judge Alsup has also referred the case to the U.S. Attorney for a possible criminal investigation. (https://techcrunch.com/2017/05/11/waymos-claims-of-trade-secret-theft-could-result-in-criminal-case/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/05/11/waymos-claims-of-trade-sec...)
- greydata 9y agoI think this one hurts more: A new entry on the docket for the case notes that Waymo’s motion for a preliminary injunction has been partially granted and partially denied, but it’s not clear yet which of Waymo’s requests the judge will honor.
- nullnilvoid 9y agoToo bad Kalanick left Trump Advisory Council already. He could have used his influence on U.S. Attorney.
- nappy 9y agoI hope this is meant with sarcasm
- nullnilvoid 9y agoUnlike you and I, many people don't speak sarcasm.
- anigbrowl 9y agoJudge Alsup is one of the sharpest minds on the bench. That's going to cause a lot of sleepless nights.
- NicoJuicy 9y agoAs soon as you said this I recognized his name, its the judge that learned Java in the Oracle vs Google case
- cheeze 9y agoThis is a pretty fascinating scenario. Between this and everything else that Uber is going through at the moment, it seems that they are going to have a very rough year. Here's to hoping that more people start using competitors so that it's easier for me to find a Lyft as quickly as I can find an uber.
- j-walker 9y agoIt's hard for any competitors to compete with Uber subsidizing each ride with VC money.
- SpartanMindset 9y agoAlways interesting to see two companies with an unlimited lawyer fund go at it in court.
- froindt 9y agoThis case reminds me of the glory days of Samsung vs. Apple in intensity and interest in the case, except it's not all wildly up in the air. It's fairly straightforward as to what side "looks" good, and it feels like it's more of determining just how bad the damage is and how far set back Uber will be.
- linkregister 9y agoI don't remember the Apple v Samsung case being up in the air; I recall widespread shock on HN at the verdict, when it looked like it would be anything but. If you look back at comments from the time, most HN commenters felt vindicated when the award was reduced on appeal.
- froindt 9y agoI wasn't around here during that dispute. As I remember it (and I could be off substantially), both sides were slinging mud at each other drawn out over a long period of many months. Both had large patent portfolios to throw at each other, along with accusations about seemingly stupid stuff, like apple suggesting Samsung not make rectangular phones. Did Apple vs Samsung seem as clear cut as Uber vs Google does now?
- dba7dba 9y agoApple and Samsung sued and counter-sued in all following nations: Germany, Japan, US, Australia, EU. Only the jury trial in Silicon Valley ended favorably for Apple. And that with a jury foreman who had a very questionable patent himself. After the trial he was saying stuff in interviews that showed he had a pretty strong bias for Apple for a few days, and than he went silent suddenly. Some suggested Apple or someone asked him to keep quiet. But who knows. The legal battle between Apple and Samsung was literally fought on more continents than WW2. WW2 wasn't fought in US but Apple-Samsung battle did take place in US.
- omarchowdhury 9y agoWhat % would Uber's stock drop today if it were a public company?
- pscsbs 9y agoOn the secondary market shares have only dropped 15-20% total since all these Uber scandals started. That still values Uber at $50-55 billion.
- linkregister 9y agoWow! That's a large drop! Can you link me to any news reports of that?
- pscsbs 9y agoIf you're an investor with access to a private equity market you can just look at the cap table and see the current asking price to determine the discount.
- arcticfox 9y agoSeriously? That's pretty shocking to me. I wonder if the secondary market was already pricing in some of the information with insider knowledge. Or another theory, in the null-scandal world, maybe Uber would have been up 50% in the same time period based on other information.
- sriram_sun 9y agoI remember reading on HN that at least one CMU researcher got paid 3 times their annual salary as a sign on bonus to join the self driving car team. I'm wondering how removed the Pittsburgh team was from Otto.
- arcticfox 9y agoI'm also curious how much of that bonus was stock, and what happens to Uber's stock if Google creams them on this
- memmcgee 9y agoOr even worse... options. You're tied to Uber with golden handcuffs and no one wants to touch you now that you've been involved in this.
- intrasight 9y agoAs a Pittsburgher, CMU alum, and friend to several outstanding Uber engineers, it just make me so angry that a couple greedy jerks could do so much harm to their worthwhile endeavour. And certainly this is bad for Pittsburgh too.
- steveb0x 9y agoMan I hate that this is the end for Uber. I've recently been trialing Lyft and, at least in my area, it always takes longer and is more expensive. But...if Uber truly is a bunch of scumbags, they deserve to burn.
- mandeepj 9y agoI have never seen surge rates with Lyft. I find lyft to be more cheaper. There are times when from ORD Chicago, Uber would display surge rates (~$55, normally ~$35). Earlier, I used to call 303 taxi which takes forever. Now, I tried lyft which costed me $34 so competition is good
- ryanx435 9y agoIn my area it is literally the same drivers as uber: all the drivers have 2 phones, one for each app.
- lern_too_spel 9y agoThe difference is the Uber app consistently underestimates the time to pick up.
- Fuzzwah 9y agoIf all the Uber drivers switch to Lyft when/if Uber dies then surely the "takes longer" part will go away.
- kyrra 9y agoSource filings provided by Forbes: Criminal Referral: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3719176-Alsup-Levandowski-Criminal-Referral.html https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3719176-Alsup-Levand... Arbitration Denial: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3719100-Alsup-Denies-Arbitration-for-Levandowski.html https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3719100-Alsup-Denies...
- icinnamon 9y agoThe articles keep referring to Waymo at "Waymo LLC". Almost every venture I've seen has been a corporation, not LLC... anything interesting as to why it's a LLC?
- linkregister 9y agoLimited Liability Corporation just has to do with the number and composition of shareholders. Most likely, Waymo has one shareholder: Alphabet, Inc. This is common among subsidiaries of large companies. If you look at the contracts you sign with your mobile phone provider or rental car agency, you'll probably see that you're contracting with a local subsidiary LLC.
- uiri 9y agoLimited Liability Company. An LLC is not a corporation although it may choose to be taxed as one. Chances are Waymo, as a wholly owned subsidiary is a single member LLC and a disregarded entity for tax purposes.
- linkregister 9y agoThanks for the correction!
- bwilliams18 9y agoProbably because it's a subsidiary of Google, an LLC is a simpler structure, and probably allows for no taxation and straightforward financial pass through , but I'm not a lawyer and I don't know any more specifics.
- beedogs 9y agoFantastic news. The sooner Uber is no longer a company, the better. Possible criminal charges are the icing on the cake.
- cryptos 9y agoWhat companies will profit when Uber fails?
- Gaelan 9y agoLyft.
- DonHopkins 9y agoPopcorn companies.
- y0ss 9y agoEvery other company that pitched "We're Uber for X" and got turned down by VCs saying "You won't be able to compete with Uber".
- enraged_camel 9y agoThis doesn't make sense. Companies that pitch they are "Uber for X" aren't competing with Uber. They are using Uber's business model in other markets.
- DonHopkins 9y agoEven my own personal transportation company targeting the rising vertical market, that I pitch in the US as "We're Uber for Elevators!" and in the UK as "We're Lyft for Lifts!". Get in on the ground floor!
- ameen 9y agoI don't think Uber will cease to exist as is. I'd like to think it's too big to fail. But Alphabet is no small Corp. They can absolutely crush Uber if they want to. Would be a shame if this is the end of the road for Uber. For all of their scandals, they've been really bullish on innovation and pushed the envelope on moving the Industry forward. I hope only the guilty are charged instead of Uber as a company having to suffer due to the wrongdoing of a few individuals.
- obmelvin 9y agoWhy should uber be too big to fail? Why should the whole company not suffer if their top management is engaged in terrible practices?
- ameen 9y agoWell, I don't think the part of the company working on the current Uber (ride hailing service) should be affected as they literally have nothing to do with the self-driving team or the managerial decisions made in regards to that. Uber has definitely provided quite a lot of people with a source of income and a cheaper/better alternative for those communting without their own vehicles. Public transportation is still shitty in many cities across the US. We can't neglect the positive impact Uber has had on the market. It was a game changer which led to it being funded as much as it has been.
- sangnoir 9y ago> Well, I don't think the part of the company working on the current Uber (ride hailing service) should be affected as they literally have nothing to do with the self-driving team or the managerial decisions made in regards to that. About that - the law doesn't agree with you as both groups are part of the same legal entity called Uber. A lot of people at Enron where doing a great job.
- memmcgee 9y agoThe despicable behavior at Uber is far from a few individuals. At the very least their entire HR division is negligent at best and malicious at worse. The problems with managers at Uber seem to apply to most of them. I'd advise anyone working at Uber to GTFO ASAP and hope the stigma doesn't follow them around for the rest of their career. I can hardly see anyone who worked in HR at Uber ever working in HR again. Uber did nothing for public transportation. They gave another way for people with money to disregard public transportation. It's just another "innovation" that provides another service to the rich at the expense of the common good.
- easilyBored 9y agoI have a feeling that as soon as the case against Uber is done, Google is going to go after Lewandowski...try to teach him a lesson and send a message to other Googlers thinking about doing the same. For strategic reasons they might have chosen to go after Uber first
- Gibbon1 9y ago> Google is going to go after Lewandowski Um... Lewandowski is going to jail.
- easilyBored 9y agoThat's Part A. Part B is going after his money. I'd go to jail for hundreds of millions, which he has /had.
- mikejb 9y agoHe already had 120+ millions. Would you go to jail for 300 million if you already had 120?
- easilyBored 9y agoNope, even $3 mil would be FU money for me. No private jet but it's not like I have one now.
- owly 9y agoClearly you've never been in jail.
- easilyBored 9y agoJail for hundreds of millions of dollars..if I got to keep it? I'd do it. Nope, never been to jail and I know it's dangerous, but then no doubt it's navigable, with that type of crime and money. Not if I already had $120 mil like he had, of course.
- Abtin88 9y agohypothetically speaking what's gonna happen if Uber opensource their lidar technology now?
- wernsey 9y agoProbably more lawsuits. Redistribution of stolen goods and so on. I won't speculate on what the outcome of such a lawsuit might be, though.
- woodandsteel 9y agoUber is claiming that Waymo has to enter arbitration because Lewandowski had an arbitration agreement with them when he worked there. Imagine if that was legally correct. Suppose a fellow worked at 5 companies in the course of 10 years, and with each company his contract included an arbitration clause and other interesting items. Then company #5 would have to honor everything relevant in the previous 4 contracts. What a mess that would be. Alsup was right to reject Uber's claim.
- siegel 9y agoAfter reading Judge Alsup's opinion, I'd be very concerned if I were Uber. Certainly not sympathetic to Uber's arguments. That being said, I was a bit surprised by his decision. I was one of the attorneys for the prevailing defendant in the Torbit v. Datanyze case that Judge Alsup heavily cites (but disagrees with). Judge Alsup distinguishes that case, in part, on the basis that California state law does not support its holding. But the California Court of Appeals just expressly adopted the holding in Torbit in a case a few weeks ago.