
In new Waymo v. Uber order, judge pounds on Waymo - hvo
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/11/in-new-waymo-v-uber-order-judge-pounds-on-waymo/
======
tyingq
"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
Got me to click

------
thisisit
From 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
As I understand it they had a contract with Levandowski saying that disputes
had to be settled by arbitration.

------
dilap
The judge in this case is pretty interesting. Here's a profile:
[https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/19/16503076/oracle-vs-
googl...](https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/19/16503076/oracle-vs-google-judge-
william-alsup-interview-waymo-uber)

