11 ms·

Waymo filing says Travis Kalanick knew engineer had Google info

226 points by janober 9y ago

csours 9y ago
So to take a kind of backwards view here, are there any consequences for Waymo if they are incorrect in this filing? Or is this the part of legal wrangling where you throw mud and see what sticks? To be sure, there's a great deal of smoke around Levandowski and the Otto acquisition, and probably some fire as well.
- rayiner 9y ago
  There are consequences, but they're more related to the adequacy of Google's basis for making the assertion rather than whether it is ultimately correct or incorrect. Accuracy of representations in filings in federal court is governed by Rule 11: https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_11 https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_11. Lawyers and their clients can be (and regularly are) sanctioned for violating the rule. The rule enumerates various requirements, but the gist of it is that you have to have a good faith basis for any legal argument or factual assertion you put in a filing. Viewed retrospectively, if you're wrong and the other side brings a Rule 11 motion for sanctions, you had better be able to explain that you acted in good faith by conducting a reasonable investigation and finding information backing up your assertion. With regards to allegations like the ones here, the backup might be, e.g. emails that tend to suggest Kalanick knew about the misappropriated IP, or even an interview with a witness who said Kalanick knew. After further discovery that could turn out to be wrong--the emails might not reveal the full context, or the witness misinterpreted the situation, or, more likely, there is simply a greater volume of emails or testimony suggesting that he did not know. That's fine under Rule 11, what matters is that there was some factual basis to begin with.
  - TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
    I understand you are a lawyer, but "After further discovery that could turn out to be wrong ... what matters is that there was some factual basis to begin with." does sound, to the lay person, a lot like throwing mud and seeing what sticks.
    - rayiner 9y ago
      I guess it depends on how you define "throwing mud and seeing what sticks." To me, that implies a lack of investigation and recklessness as to the truth. "Your honor, the Defendant cheats on his wife! What's my basis for that allegation? I mean, it could be true, so let's depose him and find out!" That will get you sanctioned. In contrast: "Your honor, the Defendant cheats on his wife! We have a hotel maid that saw a woman enter his hotel room while he was traveling on business and leave the next morning." That's a plausible allegation that may or may not turn out to be true, depending on other facts.
ishansharma 9y ago
Now just putting conspiracy theory hat for a moment, but can it be the real reason behind Travis walking out? Board got to know that this would come out and got rid of him to do some damage control?
- mrep 9y ago
  Thats what I was just thinking
- treyfitty 9y ago
  Large organizations are always making decisions behind the scenes. I wouldn't call it a "conspiracy theory" in the "tin foil hat" sense. I would just call it a theory where actors conspired to oust Travis.
  - oconnore 9y ago
    I think that's still called a conspiracy theory, but maybe with more supporting evidence than "aliens stole Waymo lidar".
zitterbewegung 9y ago
How long does Uber have left? Another post about Uber from yesterday said they had around a year left of runway. As an aside: Every day for at least the past month an Uber story talking about their failings has dominated Hacker News. I strongly believe that Uber's problems are extremely importantant, and deserve to be on the front page. But, its really tiring to talk about a company that is stumbling every single day when we could have posts about other things.
- untog 9y ago
  I suspect how long Uber has left is directly tied to Travis leaving - it was the main investors in the company that pushed him out. I suspect they used the threat of withholding a future round of funding to do so - with Travis out, I imagine Uber is safe to raise another round.
  - ithinkinstereo 9y ago
    Seems like an empty threat. If they withhold funding their already sizable investments are lost. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
    - untog 9y ago
      Yes, but if Travis refuses to step down then the value of his sizable equity in Uber is also lost. So it's a battle of the wills.
    - sdenton4 9y ago
      Mmmmm, delicious sunk cost...
    - _jal 9y ago
      Not if you believe your sunk costs are lost if he stays. The game theory is pretty straightforward there.
- baq 9y ago
  the mob wants to hear about Uber's problems, the mob upvotes Uber's problems, so there's a lot of content that the mob wants to read on the front page. wait a bit for the topic to cool down. replace the mob with happy users if you wish. disclaimer: i'm a part of the mob, it's a very interesting topic for me.
throwaway29292 9y ago
I count 4 Uber stories on the front page today. There have been a few every week since the past few months. Will this sordid saga ever end? I feel this is like watching a newsreel about the same topics every few days.
- samstave 9y ago
  This is a super annoying sentiment: * why cant we shutup about snowden already * stop posting about uber * plenty of other examples * get back to talking about [tech topic] that truly is tech etc... These are important issues. snowden was critically important to discuss. uber is important to learn from. anyone attempting to shut down/stifle/limit discussion or examination/reflection of topics that stem from, affect, and, largely define, in the minds of those not in tech, the overall image of tech, should be regarded as having dubious intentions.
  - thieving_magpie 9y ago
    Don't overreact. The person you replied to was just expressing frustration with a "sordid saga" and questioned when it will end. It's totally legitimate to feel that way. Conflating it with "stifling" and "limiting" discussion, then suggesting it has a dubious intentions. That's a little dramatic.
    - samstave 9y ago
      Sorry, I wasn't saying that he was stifling or had dubious intentions - I am saying in general, if one is too oft complaining, this could be construed... So, don't overreact to my comment either :-) It wasn't as heated as may have seemed. --- The next unicorn idea is to be able to accurately convey the tone of a sentiment via text.... maybe all text should be "mood text" and have a font color demonstrating the tone/mood it was written in ;-)
      - thieving_magpie 9y ago
        That's not a bad idea. We'll just have to write like those LARP people. thieving_magpie ponders, then blushes. Slowly looking up he whispers "Good idea sam".
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
samstave 9y ago
in all of this drama, as others have mentioned that the board may have been calculating the release of travis and perhaps others, all I can think of is just how complicit and shady everyone else on the board is. I can doubt they didnt know anything about uber's DNA and how much of a douche-factory they were running just to make a shit ton of money themselves. While I think that uber (ride sharing in general) has greatly benefited myself and millions of others, I cannot think that the board is wholly altruistic at uber, and I think the whole top pulled shady crap to get where they are. on the one hand, you want rogue companies to push the boundaries when nimby and laws which are obsolete are blocking evolution of how we live, but you also want fairness in how they accomplish this. its like a Louis CK skit, "of course, but maybe"; Of course, Uber and ride-sharing is a great idea and millions of people benefit from it existing and it showed how taxi medallion services in places like NYC were an outdated and corrupt model lining the pockets of a few at the expense of the many and now a black man can reliably get a ride uptown in minutes by the magic cab hailer in his pocket.... but maybe.... you didnt have to be a sexist, corrupt slimy douchebag to accomplish this such that your company isnt bleeding talent and the poster child for sexism in tech and actually managing to one-up zenifits HR debacle with your own literally worst HR department in history of tech stories... maybe...
- ithinkinstereo 9y ago
  Bill Gurley has a known reputation and history for being a shady VC. AngelList was created basically out of Naval's experience getting royally screwed by Gurley.
- cityzen 9y ago
  Because money.
pfarnsworth 9y ago
Why does this article not mention that when Kalanick found out that Levandowski had this material, he immediately told him that Uber didn't want it, and told him to destroy those discs? The Bloomberg article on this topic said this directly. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-22/ex-uber-ceo-kalanick-knew-of-engineer-s-google-info-waymo-says https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-22/ex-uber-c...
- _jal 9y ago
  Perhaps for the same reason you didn't mention the possibility of contempt mentioned in the Bloomberg article? There are multiple ways to tell a story. I realize partisans have discovered that yelling at journalists is a great way to distract from the underlying story, but it works better on Sunday shouty shows and swampy blogs.
  - pfarnsworth 9y ago
    That is less material to the story than the idea that Kalanick wasn't involved in some conspiracy to steal Waymo's tech. The media wants to propagate the story that Uber and Levandowski were conspiring to steal Waymo's technology, but this makes it clear that it wasn't the case, and if there was theft of secrets, it was Levandowski on his own.
    - xyzzy_plugh 9y ago
      TFA also does a poor job describing Levandowski's departure, leaving out the fact that the court effectively ordered them to do so if he wouldn't play ball. So far the only thing we actually know is that Levandowski refuses to talk, for which he lost his job.
    - _jal 9y ago
      The media wants to tell any story that gets attention. Complaining about the media is a distraction, but at least here there's the amusement of accusing the media of conspiring to tell the story of a conspiracy that doesn't exist. The contempt charge is less material to the story you are interested in talking about, but looks rather important to me. And we don't have proof of anything - Maybe Kalanick got cold feet partway through. We don't yet have sufficient detail to know what this means. Although now that you shine a light on this, it does seem to demonstrate is that Kalanick went ahead with a key hire who was anteing stolen IP. Call that what you will, but I wouldn't hire a janitor who did that, nor would knowingly I work for anyone who would do that. And it is also further recklessness - even putting aside ethics and legality, who is to say Levandowski wouldn't do the same thing to Uber if he got a better offer?
cityzen 9y ago
shocker... douchebag CEO with "win at all costs" attitude is trying to win at all costs.
seibelj 9y ago
Hollywood, please wait until this plays out before writing the script and signing on a big name actor to play Travis[0] [0] http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2016/06/jennifer-lawrence-theranos-elizabeth-holmes http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2016/06/jennifer-lawrenc...
- maxerickson 9y ago
  I think if they can get Melissa McCarthy they should go for it.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
Fricken 9y ago
Other articles on this subject note that upon hearing Levandowski possessed the stolen files, Kalanick advised him to destroy the stolen data and not bring it to Uber.
cityzen 9y ago
There is a podcast called The Dollop where one person essentially teaches another person about a particular subject. They recently did Uber and it was eye-opening to see just how shady this company has always been. I am not a fan of Uber but after listening to this I will never use them again. Podcast link: http://thedollop.libsyn.com/271-uber http://thedollop.libsyn.com/271-uber
- digi_owl 9y ago
  Basically my impression since i first heard about them. But many pushed them as just good old American "disrupters" of a "stale" market. That is until the first dirty underwear regarding office shenanigans were aired, and then the twittering classes did a one-eighty in their view of Uber. And from that point on the company has been circling the drain.
  - Consultant32452 9y ago
    I think both are true. Uber paved the way to significant improvements in taxi-ish services. Even traditional taxi services have bumped up their game in the face of actual competition. If at the end of all this we just wind up with Lyft, Uber still deserves some credit there. With all that being said, I probably won't be happy with the outcome of the lawsuits surrounding the shenanigans either. What will likely happen is Uber will get some hefty fines. But the people who will pay those fines are Uber's customers (and potentially investors). The more focus we can put on criminal and civil penalties for the individuals involved, even if that meant literally every person in the company, the better.
  - sillysaurus3 9y ago
    The myth that you can build a billion-dollar business without some shady dealings needs to die. Startups are usually faced with hard choices if they want to survive. Pretending like Kalanick himself endorsed sexual harassment is ridiculous. We don't know whether he knew, how much he knew, or how involved he was. All evidence points to "the trail of information stopped at HR." I think we like to pretend that startups should be completely moral and make no questionable decisions because of how awful companies have acted in the past. While it's true we shouldn't let history repeat itself, it's false to say that merely disrupting a market is worth criticizing. And this is what disruption looks like. Balancing morality/ethics with winning is incredibly difficult. You can be an upstanding person, thrust into the CEO chair, and still screw up. Then all of your mistakes are magnified to ridiculous proportions and people claim it's a pattern of behavior that they spotted from the start, but everyone else was too blinded to recognize. Sound familiar? Not even in Uber's case -- it's a story that's repeated itself over and over. The straightforward response is "Well, startups shouldn't act so disreputably then." I agree that you shouldn't do anything that brings harm to individuals, nor should you ignore a toxic culture at your company. But refusing to even try -- to say that if you're not perfectly honest or perfectly moral, that you shouldn't be allowed to build a company -- is a formula for letting the true snakes dominate the world. Honest people who make mistakes are better than assholes with a thirst for power. But you have to let them be willing to admit that they've made mistakes. Kalanick has done this.
edw 9y ago
I wonder if the timing of Alphabet's spinning-out of Waymo was driven or influenced by a desire to, as much as possible, distance Alphabet and, more importantly, the Google brand from what they knew would become an ugly legal battle.
djb_hackernews 9y ago
Why does the media keep calling Levandowski a plain old engineer? If Levandowski qualifies as a nameless engineer the title should read "Waymo filing says engineer knew engineer had Google info." Levandowski is a well known tech entrepreneur and was before this case, he wasn't just some worker bee Uber hired to sling code that stole IP from Google before leaving. It sort of feels like the VW emissions scandal being blamed on "engineers". No, in both cases they were well compensated, well connected, seasoned tech executives and knew what they were doing and thought they could get away with it because of their position (and likely also from experience.)
- kinkrtyavimoodh 9y ago
  Yeah, I always do a double-take when I read engineer, because I take it to mean that it was some other engineer, because obviously if it was Levandowski, they'd have mentioned him by name. He's literally the protagonist of this whole drama, and they keep referring to him as 'engineer'. WTF.
  - abakker 9y ago
    Antagonist?
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
victor22 9y ago
From over 10 years of using and kinda understanding the taxi industry, a different leader than Travis could not have entered that market. I'm not saying he's correct, but it takes a bully to scare a bully.
aresant 9y ago
Headline choice is editorializing - the actual quote "Mr.Kalanick conveyed to Mr. Levandowski in response that Mr. Levandowski should not bring any Google information into Uber and that Uber did not want any Google information. Shortly thereafter, Mr. Levandowski communicated to Uber that he had destroyed the discs"
- eridius 9y ago
  Headline choice is perfectly fine. Not only is it 100% accurate, but it's also the germane information that leads to the following statement: > This would obviously be a strong piece of support for Waymo’s case, since it establishes a timeline in which Uber was aware of Levandowski’s alleged actions even prior to finalizing their acquisition of Otto, which would in turn mean that Uber can’t claim to be completely separated from Levandowski’s actions.
antisthenes 9y ago
The cherry on top is the history of eugenics in the US, with forced sterilizations extending into the 1970's (!) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States#Compulsory_sterilization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States#... It's a chilling read, not for the faint of heart.
- xenadu02 9y ago
  Fun fact: The Nazis looked to American Eugenics and race purity laws as an inspiration. It was only after the horrors of WW2 came out that the US rejected these policies.
  - throwaway2048 9y ago
    And apartheid was modeled on the Canadian native reserve and treaty system.
  - ouid 9y ago
    that doesn't sound like a "fact". I'm not saying that you're wrong, I'm just saying that I don't believe you until you provide a source, i.e. some nazi expounding on how they never would have had the idea for racial purity if it hadn't been for america.
    - dragonwriter 9y ago
      I took “looked to American...laws for inspiration” not to mean they got the idea to care about racial purity from America (it was globally a common idea for millenia before the Nazis, and remains common today) but that, in terms of concrete policy to realize those pre-existing concernd, the racial laws of the US at the time were among the sources they consulted for ideas.
      - ouid 9y ago
        without any sort of concrete evidence that the national socialists were actively modeling their policies after US policy, I have no reason to believe this either. Two countries can have backwards policies without one having been "inspiration" for the other.
digitalzombie 9y ago
I'm glad this is happening to Uber. I do not want such a company to thrive with these type of practices. I thought they were going to win against Lyft with all these shady practices. And so I just shrug it off and chalk it up for those dirty companies stepping on people. Glad that the public have been more empathic and a conscious on these disgusting practices. Gives me hope for the future in term of businesses and higher standards.
- korzun 9y ago
  Please.
- furioussloth 9y ago
  I do not condone all the dirty practices but i always find it amusing how lyft gets a good guy trophy. Well without Uber being there doing the dirty work of fighting regulations Lyft would not exist. I would not want Lyft to go away because it is nice to have that option and competition but I would not wish for Uber to go down after all the major changes they did in last few months. Many companies get away with doing far worse. Uber more than redeemed themself.
  - zeroxfe 9y ago
    > Many companies get away with doing far worse. Yes, but that doesn't mean that Uber should get away with it. > Uber more than redeemed themself. Umm... how?
toddball 9y ago
> "Mr.Kalanick conveyed to Mr. Levandowski in response that Mr. Levandowski should not bring any Google information into Uber and that Uber did not want any Google information. Shortly thereafter, Mr. Levandowski communicated to Uber that he had destroyed the discs" Emphasis mine. Does anyone else find this to be particularly odd wording for 2016/7? When was the last time anyone here that is tech savvy use multiple disks for storage of anything? Desktop and laptop hard drives can now hold multiple terabytes of data and thumb drives now hold in excess of one terabyte. Plus, most people now use drives not discs. Most laptops don't even contain disk drives and haven't for years. I'm probably alone here, but this detail alone makes this heresay seem suspicious to me. Did anyone else find the mention of multiple discs in 2016/7 odd as well?
maheshp 9y ago
There's a very good read in HBR today on the fact that Uber's business model is predicated on illegality. Thought provoking read. https://hbr.org/2017/06/uber-cant-be-fixed-its-time-for-regulators-to-shut-it-down https://hbr.org/2017/06/uber-cant-be-fixed-its-time-for-regu...
- ErikVandeWater 9y ago
  Is there any example of a city/state government getting an exorbitant amount from Uber for violation of a statute regarding taxis? I imagine if one were to do it, many others would follow - everyone's looking for a buck.
- shas3 9y ago
  This is one of the dumber articles I've read on Uber. I don't think the author has used cabs much and is just theorizing. In a mid-size American city, I've had cabs cancel on me around half the times I've called them, leaving me stranded. I've been through an experience where someone with a fake taxi license fleeced me charging me 3X with physical intimidation. I know someone who was robbed at gunpoint by his fake cab driver. The author misrepresents the taxi industry as some sort of a philanthropic order of saints. The only times cabs have been reliable for me are when going to and from airports. Uber is fundamentally different from regulated taxis. Also, there's no moral framework for the taxi-related regulations (medallion, commercial insurance, etc.). They're both a relic of an age that has passed and a prime example of regulatory capture. It is worth noting that the byline for the article states this: > Benjamin Edelman is an associate professor at Harvard Business School and an adviser to various companies that compete against major platforms I wonder what 'major platforms'.
- ScottBurson 9y ago
  That is an interesting piece. But I think it somewhat contradicts itself. On the one hand it claims, "The company’s cultural dysfunction [...] stems from the very nature of the company’s competitive advantage: Uber’s business model is predicated on lawbreaking." On the other, it points out that Lyft was actually the groundbreaker in using unlicensed drivers; in fact it links to a 2013 Uber policy statement [0] detailing Uber's plan to start using unlicensed drivers only after competitors had been doing so unimpeded in a given metro area. The point is, Lyft was even more aggressive in ignoring the relevant legal strictures than Uber was; yet I have not seen any stories about a dysfunctional culture at Lyft, which, by the author's argument, should be even more inevitable. Indeed I know hardly anything about Lyft as a company, except that their service has worked for me when I've tried it, and the drivers seem to prefer it over Uber. If I had to say what seems to distinguish the two businesses, based on what (little) I know, I would say that Lyft seems more interested in providing a good service, while Uber seems more interested in making lots of money. I am tempted to conclude that Uber's problems are rooted more in a general lack of concern for customers, drivers, and employees than in the fact that their business model is somewhat outside the law. [0] http://web.archive.org/web/20150910144736/http:/newsroom.uber.com/2013/04/uber-policy-white-paper-1-0/ http://web.archive.org/web/20150910144736/http:/newsroom.ube...
dontblink 9y ago
Does Travis leaving now prevent him from returning at a later time as CEO under opportune circumstances? PR could spin a return if Uber starts failing and hail Travis as having learned how to lead. In other words, does anyone think this could be temporary?
nafizh 9y ago
All this Uber talk is making me dizzy. Yeah, sure, Uber is a shitty company but there are tons of them. This disproportional attention to Uber is blindsiding everyone to a lot of them. Maybe, someone should also check out Lyft for their employee treatment, company culture, and business practices. Because, apparently, they are the good guys and a lot of people are switching to them.
- sfilargi 9y ago
  While I do agree with you that a couple of Uber stories everyday with no real extra info are a bit too much, let's not put everyone in the same basket.
kcorbitt 9y ago
This is perhaps the most important claim made by Waymo since the initial filing. Waymo had already built up a preponderance of evidence that Levandowski knowingly and intentionally stole their information. There's no way he's dancing out of that at this point. But up until now, they haven't provided any evidence or, I believe, made the claim that Uber knew what was up, which puts them in the awkward position of suing someone (Uber) who may have had nothing to do with Levandowski's crime. There was lots of innuendo (Travis Kalanick took many long walks at night with Levandowski, with the discussions totally undocumented) but no smoking gun. However, if they can demonstrate to a jury that Uber execs definitely knew what Levandowski did and ignored it, that's the sort of thing that changes this lawsuit from an expensive distraction into an existential threat to Uber's self-driving car business.
- enraged_camel 9y ago
  >>However, if they can demonstrate to a jury that Uber execs definitely knew what Levandowski did and ignored it Since this is a jury trial, they only need to demonstrate it beyond reasonable doubt, no?
  - geoelectric 9y ago
    Reasonable doubt is the criminal law standard, and is relatively hard to achieve since any credible theory by the defense can undermine it. This is a civil lawsuit, so probably goes to preponderance of evidence. That's a lot easier--the plaintiff only has to prove it's more likely than not that the defendant was liable. Jury or not doesn't really come into it, except that formal criminal trials (above an infraction, at least) always involve a jury.

226 points by janober 9y ago

So to take a kind of backwards view here, are there any consequences for Waymo if they are incorrect in this filing? Or is this the part of legal wrangling where you throw mud and see what sticks? To be sure, there's a great deal of smoke around Levandowski and the Otto acquisition, and probably some fire as well.

rayiner 9y ago
There are consequences, but they're more related to the adequacy of Google's basis for making the assertion rather than whether it is ultimately correct or incorrect. Accuracy of representations in filings in federal court is governed by Rule 11: https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_11 https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_11. Lawyers and their clients can be (and regularly are) sanctioned for violating the rule. The rule enumerates various requirements, but the gist of it is that you have to have a good faith basis for any legal argument or factual assertion you put in a filing. Viewed retrospectively, if you're wrong and the other side brings a Rule 11 motion for sanctions, you had better be able to explain that you acted in good faith by conducting a reasonable investigation and finding information backing up your assertion. With regards to allegations like the ones here, the backup might be, e.g. emails that tend to suggest Kalanick knew about the misappropriated IP, or even an interview with a witness who said Kalanick knew. After further discovery that could turn out to be wrong--the emails might not reveal the full context, or the witness misinterpreted the situation, or, more likely, there is simply a greater volume of emails or testimony suggesting that he did not know. That's fine under Rule 11, what matters is that there was some factual basis to begin with.
- TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
  I understand you are a lawyer, but "After further discovery that could turn out to be wrong ... what matters is that there was some factual basis to begin with." does sound, to the lay person, a lot like throwing mud and seeing what sticks.
  - rayiner 9y ago
    I guess it depends on how you define "throwing mud and seeing what sticks." To me, that implies a lack of investigation and recklessness as to the truth. "Your honor, the Defendant cheats on his wife! What's my basis for that allegation? I mean, it could be true, so let's depose him and find out!" That will get you sanctioned. In contrast: "Your honor, the Defendant cheats on his wife! We have a hotel maid that saw a woman enter his hotel room while he was traveling on business and leave the next morning." That's a plausible allegation that may or may not turn out to be true, depending on other facts.

ishansharma 9y ago

Now just putting conspiracy theory hat for a moment, but can it be the real reason behind Travis walking out? Board got to know that this would come out and got rid of him to do some damage control?

mrep 9y ago
Thats what I was just thinking
treyfitty 9y ago
Large organizations are always making decisions behind the scenes. I wouldn't call it a "conspiracy theory" in the "tin foil hat" sense. I would just call it a theory where actors conspired to oust Travis.
- oconnore 9y ago
  I think that's still called a conspiracy theory, but maybe with more supporting evidence than "aliens stole Waymo lidar".

zitterbewegung 9y ago

How long does Uber have left? Another post about Uber from yesterday said they had around a year left of runway. As an aside: Every day for at least the past month an Uber story talking about their failings has dominated Hacker News. I strongly believe that Uber's problems are extremely importantant, and deserve to be on the front page. But, its really tiring to talk about a company that is stumbling every single day when we could have posts about other things.

untog 9y ago
I suspect how long Uber has left is directly tied to Travis leaving - it was the main investors in the company that pushed him out. I suspect they used the threat of withholding a future round of funding to do so - with Travis out, I imagine Uber is safe to raise another round.
- ithinkinstereo 9y ago
  Seems like an empty threat. If they withhold funding their already sizable investments are lost. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
  - untog 9y ago
    Yes, but if Travis refuses to step down then the value of his sizable equity in Uber is also lost. So it's a battle of the wills.
  - sdenton4 9y ago
    Mmmmm, delicious sunk cost...
  - _jal 9y ago
    Not if you believe your sunk costs are lost if he stays. The game theory is pretty straightforward there.
baq 9y ago
the mob wants to hear about Uber's problems, the mob upvotes Uber's problems, so there's a lot of content that the mob wants to read on the front page. wait a bit for the topic to cool down. replace the mob with happy users if you wish. disclaimer: i'm a part of the mob, it's a very interesting topic for me.

throwaway29292 9y ago

I count 4 Uber stories on the front page today. There have been a few every week since the past few months. Will this sordid saga ever end? I feel this is like watching a newsreel about the same topics every few days.

samstave 9y ago
This is a super annoying sentiment: * why cant we shutup about snowden already * stop posting about uber * plenty of other examples * get back to talking about [tech topic] that truly is tech etc... These are important issues. snowden was critically important to discuss. uber is important to learn from. anyone attempting to shut down/stifle/limit discussion or examination/reflection of topics that stem from, affect, and, largely define, in the minds of those not in tech, the overall image of tech, should be regarded as having dubious intentions.
- thieving_magpie 9y ago
  Don't overreact. The person you replied to was just expressing frustration with a "sordid saga" and questioned when it will end. It's totally legitimate to feel that way. Conflating it with "stifling" and "limiting" discussion, then suggesting it has a dubious intentions. That's a little dramatic.
  - samstave 9y ago
    Sorry, I wasn't saying that he was stifling or had dubious intentions - I am saying in general, if one is too oft complaining, this could be construed... So, don't overreact to my comment either :-) It wasn't as heated as may have seemed. --- The next unicorn idea is to be able to accurately convey the tone of a sentiment via text.... maybe all text should be "mood text" and have a font color demonstrating the tone/mood it was written in ;-)
    - thieving_magpie 9y ago
      That's not a bad idea. We'll just have to write like those LARP people. thieving_magpie ponders, then blushes. Slowly looking up he whispers "Good idea sam".

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

samstave 9y ago

in all of this drama, as others have mentioned that the board may have been calculating the release of travis and perhaps others, all I can think of is just how complicit and shady everyone else on the board is. I can doubt they didnt know anything about uber's DNA and how much of a douche-factory they were running just to make a shit ton of money themselves. While I think that uber (ride sharing in general) has greatly benefited myself and millions of others, I cannot think that the board is wholly altruistic at uber, and I think the whole top pulled shady crap to get where they are. on the one hand, you want rogue companies to push the boundaries when nimby and laws which are obsolete are blocking evolution of how we live, but you also want fairness in how they accomplish this. its like a Louis CK skit, "of course, but maybe"; Of course, Uber and ride-sharing is a great idea and millions of people benefit from it existing and it showed how taxi medallion services in places like NYC were an outdated and corrupt model lining the pockets of a few at the expense of the many and now a black man can reliably get a ride uptown in minutes by the magic cab hailer in his pocket.... but maybe.... you didnt have to be a sexist, corrupt slimy douchebag to accomplish this such that your company isnt bleeding talent and the poster child for sexism in tech and actually managing to one-up zenifits HR debacle with your own literally worst HR department in history of tech stories... maybe...

ithinkinstereo 9y ago
Bill Gurley has a known reputation and history for being a shady VC. AngelList was created basically out of Naval's experience getting royally screwed by Gurley.
cityzen 9y ago
Because money.

pfarnsworth 9y ago

Why does this article not mention that when Kalanick found out that Levandowski had this material, he immediately told him that Uber didn't want it, and told him to destroy those discs? The Bloomberg article on this topic said this directly. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-22/ex-uber-ceo-kalanick-knew-of-engineer-s-google-info-waymo-says https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-22/ex-uber-c...

_jal 9y ago
Perhaps for the same reason you didn't mention the possibility of contempt mentioned in the Bloomberg article? There are multiple ways to tell a story. I realize partisans have discovered that yelling at journalists is a great way to distract from the underlying story, but it works better on Sunday shouty shows and swampy blogs.
- pfarnsworth 9y ago
  That is less material to the story than the idea that Kalanick wasn't involved in some conspiracy to steal Waymo's tech. The media wants to propagate the story that Uber and Levandowski were conspiring to steal Waymo's technology, but this makes it clear that it wasn't the case, and if there was theft of secrets, it was Levandowski on his own.
  - xyzzy_plugh 9y ago
    TFA also does a poor job describing Levandowski's departure, leaving out the fact that the court effectively ordered them to do so if he wouldn't play ball. So far the only thing we actually know is that Levandowski refuses to talk, for which he lost his job.
  - _jal 9y ago
    The media wants to tell any story that gets attention. Complaining about the media is a distraction, but at least here there's the amusement of accusing the media of conspiring to tell the story of a conspiracy that doesn't exist. The contempt charge is less material to the story you are interested in talking about, but looks rather important to me. And we don't have proof of anything - Maybe Kalanick got cold feet partway through. We don't yet have sufficient detail to know what this means. Although now that you shine a light on this, it does seem to demonstrate is that Kalanick went ahead with a key hire who was anteing stolen IP. Call that what you will, but I wouldn't hire a janitor who did that, nor would knowingly I work for anyone who would do that. And it is also further recklessness - even putting aside ethics and legality, who is to say Levandowski wouldn't do the same thing to Uber if he got a better offer?

cityzen 9y ago

shocker... douchebag CEO with "win at all costs" attitude is trying to win at all costs.

seibelj 9y ago

Hollywood, please wait until this plays out before writing the script and signing on a big name actor to play Travis[0] [0] http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2016/06/jennifer-lawrence-theranos-elizabeth-holmes http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2016/06/jennifer-lawrenc...

maxerickson 9y ago
I think if they can get Melissa McCarthy they should go for it.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

Fricken 9y ago

Other articles on this subject note that upon hearing Levandowski possessed the stolen files, Kalanick advised him to destroy the stolen data and not bring it to Uber.

cityzen 9y ago

There is a podcast called The Dollop where one person essentially teaches another person about a particular subject. They recently did Uber and it was eye-opening to see just how shady this company has always been. I am not a fan of Uber but after listening to this I will never use them again. Podcast link: http://thedollop.libsyn.com/271-uber http://thedollop.libsyn.com/271-uber

digi_owl 9y ago
Basically my impression since i first heard about them. But many pushed them as just good old American "disrupters" of a "stale" market. That is until the first dirty underwear regarding office shenanigans were aired, and then the twittering classes did a one-eighty in their view of Uber. And from that point on the company has been circling the drain.
- Consultant32452 9y ago
  I think both are true. Uber paved the way to significant improvements in taxi-ish services. Even traditional taxi services have bumped up their game in the face of actual competition. If at the end of all this we just wind up with Lyft, Uber still deserves some credit there. With all that being said, I probably won't be happy with the outcome of the lawsuits surrounding the shenanigans either. What will likely happen is Uber will get some hefty fines. But the people who will pay those fines are Uber's customers (and potentially investors). The more focus we can put on criminal and civil penalties for the individuals involved, even if that meant literally every person in the company, the better.
- sillysaurus3 9y ago
  The myth that you can build a billion-dollar business without some shady dealings needs to die. Startups are usually faced with hard choices if they want to survive. Pretending like Kalanick himself endorsed sexual harassment is ridiculous. We don't know whether he knew, how much he knew, or how involved he was. All evidence points to "the trail of information stopped at HR." I think we like to pretend that startups should be completely moral and make no questionable decisions because of how awful companies have acted in the past. While it's true we shouldn't let history repeat itself, it's false to say that merely disrupting a market is worth criticizing. And this is what disruption looks like. Balancing morality/ethics with winning is incredibly difficult. You can be an upstanding person, thrust into the CEO chair, and still screw up. Then all of your mistakes are magnified to ridiculous proportions and people claim it's a pattern of behavior that they spotted from the start, but everyone else was too blinded to recognize. Sound familiar? Not even in Uber's case -- it's a story that's repeated itself over and over. The straightforward response is "Well, startups shouldn't act so disreputably then." I agree that you shouldn't do anything that brings harm to individuals, nor should you ignore a toxic culture at your company. But refusing to even try -- to say that if you're not perfectly honest or perfectly moral, that you shouldn't be allowed to build a company -- is a formula for letting the true snakes dominate the world. Honest people who make mistakes are better than assholes with a thirst for power. But you have to let them be willing to admit that they've made mistakes. Kalanick has done this.

edw 9y ago

I wonder if the timing of Alphabet's spinning-out of Waymo was driven or influenced by a desire to, as much as possible, distance Alphabet and, more importantly, the Google brand from what they knew would become an ugly legal battle.

djb_hackernews 9y ago

Why does the media keep calling Levandowski a plain old engineer? If Levandowski qualifies as a nameless engineer the title should read "Waymo filing says engineer knew engineer had Google info." Levandowski is a well known tech entrepreneur and was before this case, he wasn't just some worker bee Uber hired to sling code that stole IP from Google before leaving. It sort of feels like the VW emissions scandal being blamed on "engineers". No, in both cases they were well compensated, well connected, seasoned tech executives and knew what they were doing and thought they could get away with it because of their position (and likely also from experience.)

kinkrtyavimoodh 9y ago
Yeah, I always do a double-take when I read engineer, because I take it to mean that it was some other engineer, because obviously if it was Levandowski, they'd have mentioned him by name. He's literally the protagonist of this whole drama, and they keep referring to him as 'engineer'. WTF.
- abakker 9y ago
  Antagonist?
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]

victor22 9y ago

From over 10 years of using and kinda understanding the taxi industry, a different leader than Travis could not have entered that market. I'm not saying he's correct, but it takes a bully to scare a bully.

aresant 9y ago

Headline choice is editorializing - the actual quote "Mr.Kalanick conveyed to Mr. Levandowski in response that Mr. Levandowski should not bring any Google information into Uber and that Uber did not want any Google information. Shortly thereafter, Mr. Levandowski communicated to Uber that he had destroyed the discs"

eridius 9y ago
Headline choice is perfectly fine. Not only is it 100% accurate, but it's also the germane information that leads to the following statement: > This would obviously be a strong piece of support for Waymo’s case, since it establishes a timeline in which Uber was aware of Levandowski’s alleged actions even prior to finalizing their acquisition of Otto, which would in turn mean that Uber can’t claim to be completely separated from Levandowski’s actions.

antisthenes 9y ago

The cherry on top is the history of eugenics in the US, with forced sterilizations extending into the 1970's (!) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States#Compulsory_sterilization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States#... It's a chilling read, not for the faint of heart.

xenadu02 9y ago
Fun fact: The Nazis looked to American Eugenics and race purity laws as an inspiration. It was only after the horrors of WW2 came out that the US rejected these policies.
- throwaway2048 9y ago
  And apartheid was modeled on the Canadian native reserve and treaty system.
- ouid 9y ago
  that doesn't sound like a "fact". I'm not saying that you're wrong, I'm just saying that I don't believe you until you provide a source, i.e. some nazi expounding on how they never would have had the idea for racial purity if it hadn't been for america.
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    I took “looked to American...laws for inspiration” not to mean they got the idea to care about racial purity from America (it was globally a common idea for millenia before the Nazis, and remains common today) but that, in terms of concrete policy to realize those pre-existing concernd, the racial laws of the US at the time were among the sources they consulted for ideas.
    - ouid 9y ago
      without any sort of concrete evidence that the national socialists were actively modeling their policies after US policy, I have no reason to believe this either. Two countries can have backwards policies without one having been "inspiration" for the other.

digitalzombie 9y ago

I'm glad this is happening to Uber. I do not want such a company to thrive with these type of practices. I thought they were going to win against Lyft with all these shady practices. And so I just shrug it off and chalk it up for those dirty companies stepping on people. Glad that the public have been more empathic and a conscious on these disgusting practices. Gives me hope for the future in term of businesses and higher standards.

korzun 9y ago
Please.
furioussloth 9y ago
I do not condone all the dirty practices but i always find it amusing how lyft gets a good guy trophy. Well without Uber being there doing the dirty work of fighting regulations Lyft would not exist. I would not want Lyft to go away because it is nice to have that option and competition but I would not wish for Uber to go down after all the major changes they did in last few months. Many companies get away with doing far worse. Uber more than redeemed themself.
- zeroxfe 9y ago
  > Many companies get away with doing far worse. Yes, but that doesn't mean that Uber should get away with it. > Uber more than redeemed themself. Umm... how?

toddball 9y ago

> "Mr.Kalanick conveyed to Mr. Levandowski in response that Mr. Levandowski should not bring any Google information into Uber and that Uber did not want any Google information. Shortly thereafter, Mr. Levandowski communicated to Uber that he had destroyed the discs" Emphasis mine. Does anyone else find this to be particularly odd wording for 2016/7? When was the last time anyone here that is tech savvy use multiple disks for storage of anything? Desktop and laptop hard drives can now hold multiple terabytes of data and thumb drives now hold in excess of one terabyte. Plus, most people now use drives not discs. Most laptops don't even contain disk drives and haven't for years. I'm probably alone here, but this detail alone makes this heresay seem suspicious to me. Did anyone else find the mention of multiple discs in 2016/7 odd as well?

maheshp 9y ago

There's a very good read in HBR today on the fact that Uber's business model is predicated on illegality. Thought provoking read. https://hbr.org/2017/06/uber-cant-be-fixed-its-time-for-regulators-to-shut-it-down https://hbr.org/2017/06/uber-cant-be-fixed-its-time-for-regu...

ErikVandeWater 9y ago
Is there any example of a city/state government getting an exorbitant amount from Uber for violation of a statute regarding taxis? I imagine if one were to do it, many others would follow - everyone's looking for a buck.
shas3 9y ago
This is one of the dumber articles I've read on Uber. I don't think the author has used cabs much and is just theorizing. In a mid-size American city, I've had cabs cancel on me around half the times I've called them, leaving me stranded. I've been through an experience where someone with a fake taxi license fleeced me charging me 3X with physical intimidation. I know someone who was robbed at gunpoint by his fake cab driver. The author misrepresents the taxi industry as some sort of a philanthropic order of saints. The only times cabs have been reliable for me are when going to and from airports. Uber is fundamentally different from regulated taxis. Also, there's no moral framework for the taxi-related regulations (medallion, commercial insurance, etc.). They're both a relic of an age that has passed and a prime example of regulatory capture. It is worth noting that the byline for the article states this: > Benjamin Edelman is an associate professor at Harvard Business School and an adviser to various companies that compete against major platforms I wonder what 'major platforms'.
ScottBurson 9y ago
That is an interesting piece. But I think it somewhat contradicts itself. On the one hand it claims, "The company’s cultural dysfunction [...] stems from the very nature of the company’s competitive advantage: Uber’s business model is predicated on lawbreaking." On the other, it points out that Lyft was actually the groundbreaker in using unlicensed drivers; in fact it links to a 2013 Uber policy statement [0] detailing Uber's plan to start using unlicensed drivers only after competitors had been doing so unimpeded in a given metro area. The point is, Lyft was even more aggressive in ignoring the relevant legal strictures than Uber was; yet I have not seen any stories about a dysfunctional culture at Lyft, which, by the author's argument, should be even more inevitable. Indeed I know hardly anything about Lyft as a company, except that their service has worked for me when I've tried it, and the drivers seem to prefer it over Uber. If I had to say what seems to distinguish the two businesses, based on what (little) I know, I would say that Lyft seems more interested in providing a good service, while Uber seems more interested in making lots of money. I am tempted to conclude that Uber's problems are rooted more in a general lack of concern for customers, drivers, and employees than in the fact that their business model is somewhat outside the law. [0] http://web.archive.org/web/20150910144736/http:/newsroom.uber.com/2013/04/uber-policy-white-paper-1-0/ http://web.archive.org/web/20150910144736/http:/newsroom.ube...

dontblink 9y ago

Does Travis leaving now prevent him from returning at a later time as CEO under opportune circumstances? PR could spin a return if Uber starts failing and hail Travis as having learned how to lead. In other words, does anyone think this could be temporary?

nafizh 9y ago

All this Uber talk is making me dizzy. Yeah, sure, Uber is a shitty company but there are tons of them. This disproportional attention to Uber is blindsiding everyone to a lot of them. Maybe, someone should also check out Lyft for their employee treatment, company culture, and business practices. Because, apparently, they are the good guys and a lot of people are switching to them.

sfilargi 9y ago
While I do agree with you that a couple of Uber stories everyday with no real extra info are a bit too much, let's not put everyone in the same basket.

kcorbitt 9y ago

This is perhaps the most important claim made by Waymo since the initial filing. Waymo had already built up a preponderance of evidence that Levandowski knowingly and intentionally stole their information. There's no way he's dancing out of that at this point. But up until now, they haven't provided any evidence or, I believe, made the claim that Uber knew what was up, which puts them in the awkward position of suing someone (Uber) who may have had nothing to do with Levandowski's crime. There was lots of innuendo (Travis Kalanick took many long walks at night with Levandowski, with the discussions totally undocumented) but no smoking gun. However, if they can demonstrate to a jury that Uber execs definitely knew what Levandowski did and ignored it, that's the sort of thing that changes this lawsuit from an expensive distraction into an existential threat to Uber's self-driving car business.

enraged_camel 9y ago
>>However, if they can demonstrate to a jury that Uber execs definitely knew what Levandowski did and ignored it Since this is a jury trial, they only need to demonstrate it beyond reasonable doubt, no?
- geoelectric 9y ago
  Reasonable doubt is the criminal law standard, and is relatively hard to achieve since any credible theory by the defense can undermine it. This is a civil lawsuit, so probably goes to preponderance of evidence. That's a lot easier--the plaintiff only has to prove it's more likely than not that the defendant was liable. Jury or not doesn't really come into it, except that formal criminal trials (above an infraction, at least) always involve a jury.