4 ms·
In new Waymo v. Uber order, judge pounds on Waymo
- thisisit 9y agoFrom the Judge Alsup's write up: > Having made and benefitted from its strategic choice to not name Levandowski as a defendant, Waymo may not renege and suggest that Otto Trucking—or any other defendant—is somehow a stand-in for Levandowski, or that misappropriation by Levandowski is somehow automatically transmogrified into misrepresentation by Otto Trucking—or any other defendant—such that Waymo need not separately prove the latter. So, the issue in question is not naming Levandowski as a defendant. Any ideas on why would Waymo's lawyers do this?
- mjw1007 9y agoAs I understand it they had a contract with Levandowski saying that disputes had to be settled by arbitration.
- tyingq 9y ago"Pounds on Waymo" feels a bit editorialized. The overall feel is that the judge is saying that Otto isn't the liable party if what Waymo says is true...rather that either Uber or Levandowski himself is the liable party.
- fullshark 9y agoGot me to click
- dilap 9y agoThe judge in this case is pretty interesting. Here's a profile: https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/19/16503076/oracle-vs-google-judge-william-alsup-interview-waymo-uber https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/19/16503076/oracle-vs-googl...