4 ms·

He's probably going to be sued by Waymo, likely with Uber's full cooperation. The part of Google's case that always seemed the strongest was their forensic evid

He's probably going to be sued by Waymo, likely with Uber's full cooperation. The part of Google's case that always seemed the strongest was their forensic evidence of his misconduct just before he left. He could also be sued by Uber if he lied or omitted anything during the Otto acquisition.

theptip 9y ago
Waymo already pursued arbitration against Levandowsi, I'm unclear on whether that they can go after him again: https://techcrunch.com/2017/03/29/waymo-pursued-arbitration-with-anthony-levandowski-before-it-sued-uber/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/03/29/waymo-pursued-arbitration-...
- dpark 9y ago
  I don't see how it's unclear. You can't go through arbitration and then sue because you want more than arbitration awarded you. The entire point of arbitration is that it's binding and final, specifically to avoid the messy lawsuit process.
  - beambot 9y ago
    Probably true. But if he made fraudulent or false statements during arbitration that are later proven as such, I assume that could reopen him to lawsuits
  - theptip 9y ago
    I'm not sure whether the arbitration covered all of the crimes that Levandowski allegedly committed; from the article, > “Waymo asserts no claims for trade secret misappropriation in those arbitrations." That article describes the arbitration being about poaching/non-compete agreement violations. If they didn't raise the trade secret theft allegations, are they allowed to come back for another try? Or did they miss their opportunity?
    - dpark 9y ago
      Arbitration does not and cannot cover crimes. Arbitration is a civil matter. I would imagine that the arbitration agreement included a clause along the lines of "Alphabet will not pursue any further legal claims against Levandowski related to his time of employment." and vice versa. I could be wrong, of course, but I doubt arbitration left open a lot of space for future action. Without the arbitration being unsealed, though, I have no way of knowing. Of course, the US DoJ and/or California equivalents can still pursue criminal charges against Levandowski.

theptip 9y ago

Waymo already pursued arbitration against Levandowsi, I'm unclear on whether that they can go after him again: https://techcrunch.com/2017/03/29/waymo-pursued-arbitration-with-anthony-levandowski-before-it-sued-uber/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/03/29/waymo-pursued-arbitration-...

dpark 9y ago
I don't see how it's unclear. You can't go through arbitration and then sue because you want more than arbitration awarded you. The entire point of arbitration is that it's binding and final, specifically to avoid the messy lawsuit process.
- beambot 9y ago
  Probably true. But if he made fraudulent or false statements during arbitration that are later proven as such, I assume that could reopen him to lawsuits
- theptip 9y ago
  I'm not sure whether the arbitration covered all of the crimes that Levandowski allegedly committed; from the article, > “Waymo asserts no claims for trade secret misappropriation in those arbitrations." That article describes the arbitration being about poaching/non-compete agreement violations. If they didn't raise the trade secret theft allegations, are they allowed to come back for another try? Or did they miss their opportunity?
  - dpark 9y ago
    Arbitration does not and cannot cover crimes. Arbitration is a civil matter. I would imagine that the arbitration agreement included a clause along the lines of "Alphabet will not pursue any further legal claims against Levandowski related to his time of employment." and vice versa. I could be wrong, of course, but I doubt arbitration left open a lot of space for future action. Without the arbitration being unsealed, though, I have no way of knowing. Of course, the US DoJ and/or California equivalents can still pursue criminal charges against Levandowski.