4 ms·

And now we see the scapegoat being thrown under the bus. Google claims Uber execs were meeting with Levandowski long before he left Google, that his entire lea

by mabbo 9y ago

And now we see the scapegoat being thrown under the bus. Google claims Uber execs were meeting with Levandowski long before he left Google, that his entire leaving Google to form Otto (which would be soon bought by Uber) was planned alongside Uber. Now Uber is saying "Hey, we didn't know anything about that, but I think you guys really should go after this guy here". Somehow, given Uber's reputation as a moral and ethical company, I am not shocked by this development. Edit: And another thought- why wouldn't Levandowski now walk into the justice department and say "Give me immunity, and I'll give you all the evidence that Uber was in on this plan from the start". If Uber are going to screw him over, why wouldn't he return the favour?

mifreewil 9y ago
> And now we see the scapegoat being thrown under the bus. Yeah, in official communications, of course. I haven't been following the story that closely, but I wonder if things are actually adversarial and turning into a blame game behind the scenes at Uber, or whether they are just executing on a united defense strategy.
pcsanwald 9y ago
This is a public comment, how else would you expect them to respond as a company? It doesn't mean Levandowski is actually being thrown under the bus.
bitmapbrother 9y ago
I'm sure Levandowski would gladly lie under that bus in order to keep his proceeds from the sale. If he tried to get revenge those proceeds might very well be in jeopardy.
- CodeWriter23 9y ago
  I'm thinking being terminated with cause will have a negative effect on the Otto transaction. Did they just hand him $680M on day one? I think deals like this are structured with progress payments, milestones and maybe incentives for hitting milestones early.
  - ProAm 9y ago
    I dont think it matters if Uber failed to do proper due diligence, once the paperwork is signed it's pretty much a done deal.
    - smileysteve 9y ago
      Fraud tends to be able to be pursued civilly. (And if he sold Uber a bunch of IP that he didn't own, then that's textbook fraud)
Steko 9y ago
> why wouldn't Levandowski now walk into the justice department Has Trump not gotten around to firing the US attorneys who were investigating his boy Travis?
r00fus 9y ago
I guess I shouldn't be surprised, but it's pretty clear: if you're at Uber and you did something potentially unsavory, and are not well-connected you may indeed be walking around with a target on your back. Not sure I could stomach that for too long.
desdiv 9y ago
>"Give me immunity, and I'll give you all the evidence that Uber was in on this plan from the start" I get that Uber is a toxic company, but I'm not sure if immunity is a good idea. "If you steal on behalf of Big Corp and gets caught, you can just rat out Big Corp and get off scot-free." Is that really the sort of signal that we want our court systems to send out?
- ryanx435 9y ago
  yes. we absolutely want to encourage whistle blowers. obviously the level of immunity will vary based on the circumstances of each case, but again, we absolutely want to encourage this type of behavior.
  - jlarocco 9y ago
    > yes. we absolutely want to encourage whistle blowers. What? Levandowski can't be a whistle blower here because he had a central role in the (alleged) criminal activity. The case wouldn't even exist without him. If the allegations are true, the best he's going to get for turning on Uber is a plea deal.
  - ggggtez 9y ago
    Whistle blower tend to be lower on the totem pole. If it really is conspiracy your not likely going to see anyone in the court offer immunities for something he benefited hundreds of millions of dollars for.
    - matt_wulfeck 9y ago
      That can all be worked out as part of his plea deal.
  - mattnewton 9y ago
    How would he be a whistle blower? He didn't allegedly witness it, he allegedly did the deed!
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
hvo 9y ago
I am thinking,this is going to get really really ugly as Levandowski wont go down without a fight.
hn_throw_1234 9y ago
Maybe because Uber wasn't actually in on it?
- mabbo 9y ago
  There will soon by a trial where we'll get to find out. The biggest problem with their defense is that they have for so long been so loud and obnoxious about flaunting laws. It's easy to believe Google's claims.

by mabbo 9y ago

mifreewil 9y ago

> And now we see the scapegoat being thrown under the bus. Yeah, in official communications, of course. I haven't been following the story that closely, but I wonder if things are actually adversarial and turning into a blame game behind the scenes at Uber, or whether they are just executing on a united defense strategy.

pcsanwald 9y ago

This is a public comment, how else would you expect them to respond as a company? It doesn't mean Levandowski is actually being thrown under the bus.

bitmapbrother 9y ago

I'm sure Levandowski would gladly lie under that bus in order to keep his proceeds from the sale. If he tried to get revenge those proceeds might very well be in jeopardy.

CodeWriter23 9y ago
I'm thinking being terminated with cause will have a negative effect on the Otto transaction. Did they just hand him $680M on day one? I think deals like this are structured with progress payments, milestones and maybe incentives for hitting milestones early.
- ProAm 9y ago
  I dont think it matters if Uber failed to do proper due diligence, once the paperwork is signed it's pretty much a done deal.
  - smileysteve 9y ago
    Fraud tends to be able to be pursued civilly. (And if he sold Uber a bunch of IP that he didn't own, then that's textbook fraud)

Steko 9y ago

> why wouldn't Levandowski now walk into the justice department Has Trump not gotten around to firing the US attorneys who were investigating his boy Travis?

r00fus 9y ago

I guess I shouldn't be surprised, but it's pretty clear: if you're at Uber and you did something potentially unsavory, and are not well-connected you may indeed be walking around with a target on your back. Not sure I could stomach that for too long.

desdiv 9y ago

>"Give me immunity, and I'll give you all the evidence that Uber was in on this plan from the start" I get that Uber is a toxic company, but I'm not sure if immunity is a good idea. "If you steal on behalf of Big Corp and gets caught, you can just rat out Big Corp and get off scot-free." Is that really the sort of signal that we want our court systems to send out?

ryanx435 9y ago
yes. we absolutely want to encourage whistle blowers. obviously the level of immunity will vary based on the circumstances of each case, but again, we absolutely want to encourage this type of behavior.
- jlarocco 9y ago
  > yes. we absolutely want to encourage whistle blowers. What? Levandowski can't be a whistle blower here because he had a central role in the (alleged) criminal activity. The case wouldn't even exist without him. If the allegations are true, the best he's going to get for turning on Uber is a plea deal.
- ggggtez 9y ago
  Whistle blower tend to be lower on the totem pole. If it really is conspiracy your not likely going to see anyone in the court offer immunities for something he benefited hundreds of millions of dollars for.
  - matt_wulfeck 9y ago
    That can all be worked out as part of his plea deal.
- mattnewton 9y ago
  How would he be a whistle blower? He didn't allegedly witness it, he allegedly did the deed!
TeMPOraL 9y ago

hvo 9y ago

I am thinking,this is going to get really really ugly as Levandowski wont go down without a fight.

hn_throw_1234 9y ago

Maybe because Uber wasn't actually in on it?

mabbo 9y ago
There will soon by a trial where we'll get to find out. The biggest problem with their defense is that they have for so long been so loud and obnoxious about flaunting laws. It's easy to believe Google's claims.