5 ms·

Waymo says they have proof of #1 and #2. We found that six weeks before his resignation this former employee, Anthony Levandowski, downloaded over 14,000 highl

by gvb 9y ago

Waymo says they have proof of #1 and #2. We found that six weeks before his resignation this former employee, Anthony Levandowski, downloaded over 14,000 highly confidential and proprietary design files for Waymo’s various hardware systems, including designs of Waymo’s LiDAR and circuit board. To gain access to Waymo’s design server, Mr. Levandowski searched for and installed specialized software onto his company-issued laptop. Once inside, he downloaded 9.7 GB of Waymo’s highly confidential files and trade secrets, including blueprints, design files and testing documentation. Then he connected an external drive to the laptop. Mr. Levandowski then wiped and reformatted the laptop in an attempt to erase forensic fingerprints. Ref: https://medium.com/waymo/a-note-on-our-lawsuit-against-otto-and-uber-86f4f98902a1#.3vm7k8r6n https://medium.com/waymo/a-note-on-our-lawsuit-against-otto-...

kbenson 9y ago
After reading the transcript of the testimony on what Google actually knows about (1), it's actually less convincing in my opinion than Google's wording makes it sound (which is to be expected from lawyers making a case). I still believe Levandowski likely took trade secrets, but it's much less compelling when you read the details. There's a link to it in this HN comment[1], and I reply with what I think is a fair summary. 1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14261591 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14261591
- woodandsteel 9y ago
  Part of the problem for Uber is that, as is standard in acquisitions, Uber commissioned a due diligence report to try to determine the odds there was stolen IP involved when they were thinking of buying Levandowski's company. Now that ought to be evidence that Uber could use in its defense. Instead, Uber is going to extrordinary lengths to try to keep it out of the trial.
  - kbenson 9y ago
    Sure. I'm not coming in on the side of Uber, I'm just calling into question the idea of taking Google's initial allegations, and the assumptions that are often made from them, as evidence instead of the actual filing which paints the story slightly differently. Personally, I suspect we'll eventually fine out that Levandoswki - and others, check the filing - did steal trade secrets.
- dsp1234 9y ago
  More specifically, the "specialized software" was TortoiseSVN, and the "downloaded over 14,000 ... downloaded 9.7 GB" was an SVN checkout. An SVN client being used to access an SVN repository is hardly unusual, certainly not in the way insinuated by the wording presented.
  - jsmthrowaway 9y ago
    If I recall, Google/Waymo claimed in their filing that he had never used the Subversion repository in question from that laptop in the course of his employment, until that moment. They further claim he actually searched MoMA for how to access it as well as how to do end-to-end setup. He then left not long after that checkout. That is unusual, if true.
    - kbenson 9y ago
      Yes, but it was also a previously unused laptop, so it's not all that unusual for someone setting up a work system to make sure their work access is set up. It is odd that it happened towards the end, and that it wasn't used afterwards, but I can also see it being something I might do in preperation if I had to take a short trip and hadn't set up a remote work laptop yet or my prior one was causing problems. That it wasn't used might have been that he ended up not doing any work (or any work that required the laptop) during the period he wanted it. A single normal SVN checkout during the setup would get every file in the repo by default. Basically, I don't think it's hard to construct an entirely innocent narrative of events (assuming SVN access was normal for him). The later developments do make it look fishy, but since I doubt anyone would have thought anything amiss with the list of actions without the later events, it's far from a smoking gun when taken by itself.
      - huac 9y ago
        Google alleges he then copied the files onto a portable hard drive and wiped the laptop, which shows a pretty strong intent to deceive.
        9y ago

by gvb 9y ago

kbenson 9y ago

After reading the transcript of the testimony on what Google actually knows about (1), it's actually less convincing in my opinion than Google's wording makes it sound (which is to be expected from lawyers making a case). I still believe Levandowski likely took trade secrets, but it's much less compelling when you read the details. There's a link to it in this HN comment[1], and I reply with what I think is a fair summary. 1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14261591 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14261591

woodandsteel 9y ago
Part of the problem for Uber is that, as is standard in acquisitions, Uber commissioned a due diligence report to try to determine the odds there was stolen IP involved when they were thinking of buying Levandowski's company. Now that ought to be evidence that Uber could use in its defense. Instead, Uber is going to extrordinary lengths to try to keep it out of the trial.
- kbenson 9y ago
  Sure. I'm not coming in on the side of Uber, I'm just calling into question the idea of taking Google's initial allegations, and the assumptions that are often made from them, as evidence instead of the actual filing which paints the story slightly differently. Personally, I suspect we'll eventually fine out that Levandoswki - and others, check the filing - did steal trade secrets.
dsp1234 9y ago
More specifically, the "specialized software" was TortoiseSVN, and the "downloaded over 14,000 ... downloaded 9.7 GB" was an SVN checkout. An SVN client being used to access an SVN repository is hardly unusual, certainly not in the way insinuated by the wording presented.
- jsmthrowaway 9y ago
  If I recall, Google/Waymo claimed in their filing that he had never used the Subversion repository in question from that laptop in the course of his employment, until that moment. They further claim he actually searched MoMA for how to access it as well as how to do end-to-end setup. He then left not long after that checkout. That is unusual, if true.
  - kbenson 9y ago
    Yes, but it was also a previously unused laptop, so it's not all that unusual for someone setting up a work system to make sure their work access is set up. It is odd that it happened towards the end, and that it wasn't used afterwards, but I can also see it being something I might do in preperation if I had to take a short trip and hadn't set up a remote work laptop yet or my prior one was causing problems. That it wasn't used might have been that he ended up not doing any work (or any work that required the laptop) during the period he wanted it. A single normal SVN checkout during the setup would get every file in the repo by default. Basically, I don't think it's hard to construct an entirely innocent narrative of events (assuming SVN access was normal for him). The later developments do make it look fishy, but since I doubt anyone would have thought anything amiss with the list of actions without the later events, it's far from a smoking gun when taken by itself.
    - huac 9y ago
      Google alleges he then copied the files onto a portable hard drive and wiped the laptop, which shows a pretty strong intent to deceive.
      - 9y ago