5 ms·

Does anyone have insight into what the opposing lawyers are trying to get at by asking about the $120M bonus? It feels like they are establishing Levandowski's

by keyanp 9y ago

Does anyone have insight into what the opposing lawyers are trying to get at by asking about the $120M bonus? It feels like they are establishing Levandowski's importance to Waymo maybe? But it isn't clear to me how/if this helps their case. > I'd like to start by asking you some questions about the bonus that was paid to Anthony Levandowski. He received a bonus that was in excess of $120 million; is that right? > was there any other occasion where any employee received more than $100 million for what you described as "start-up-like compensation"? > Sitting here today, can you recall of any other employee who received more than $100 million in what you've described as start-up compensation at Google?

SOLAR_FIELDS 9y ago
My guess is that if they viewed him as important they can try to establish that they should have known he was doing what he was doing, instead of going behind Google's back and doing this without their knowledge. If he was that important to the company (by virtue of his pay), then it's easier to try to establish that Google was somewhat negligently not paying attention to a "top employee"
- unityByFreedom 9y ago
  or show that the employee was more prized than any stolen documents, thus downplaying the significance of the documents
- Qwertious 9y ago
  An obvious response to that is "we also gave him lots of autonomy, because not having to deal with bureaucracy is a perk".
novia 9y ago
Does anyone have insight into what the opposing lawyers are trying to get at by asking about the $120M bonus? It feels like they are establishing Levandowski's importance to Waymo maybe? But it isn't clear to me how/if this helps their case. Reminds me of the Silicon Valley subplot where Hooli gives Big Head outrageous compensation so they can use him in a legal proceeding. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0owqfskr_jQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0owqfskr_jQ My guess is that Uber's lawyers are trying to gather evidence for the argument that nothing was stolen from Waymo: Levandowski was (supposedly) so crucial to the success of Waymo that when he went to work for Uber, he was just bringing over his own IP.

by keyanp 9y ago

SOLAR_FIELDS 9y ago

My guess is that if they viewed him as important they can try to establish that they should have known he was doing what he was doing, instead of going behind Google's back and doing this without their knowledge. If he was that important to the company (by virtue of his pay), then it's easier to try to establish that Google was somewhat negligently not paying attention to a "top employee"

unityByFreedom 9y ago
or show that the employee was more prized than any stolen documents, thus downplaying the significance of the documents
Qwertious 9y ago
An obvious response to that is "we also gave him lots of autonomy, because not having to deal with bureaucracy is a perk".

novia 9y ago

Does anyone have insight into what the opposing lawyers are trying to get at by asking about the $120M bonus? It feels like they are establishing Levandowski's importance to Waymo maybe? But it isn't clear to me how/if this helps their case. Reminds me of the Silicon Valley subplot where Hooli gives Big Head outrageous compensation so they can use him in a legal proceeding. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0owqfskr_jQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0owqfskr_jQ My guess is that Uber's lawyers are trying to gather evidence for the argument that nothing was stolen from Waymo: Levandowski was (supposedly) so crucial to the success of Waymo that when he went to work for Uber, he was just bringing over his own IP.