
U.S. prosecutors seek 27 months imprisonment for former Uber self-driving head - prostoalex
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-uber-autonomous-levandowski-idUSKCN24U125
======
zacksinclair
> “It is, unfortunately, no exaggeration to say that a prison sentence today
> can amount to the imposition of a serious health crisis, even a death
> sentence, given the BOP’s (Federal Bureau of Prisons) current inability to
> control the spread of the coronavirus,” Levandowski’s attorneys wrote.

I find this ridiculous for his attorneys to use as a defense against his
potential incarceration. While likely true (and certainly deplorable on its
own), this applies to anyone going through the criminal justice system and
Levandowski is no special case. Conditions in prison should hardly be an
excuse for house arrest vs incarceration.

~~~
josefresco
I dunno, if I was fighting for my freedom I sure would hope my attorneys do
_everything_ (legal) in their power to assist in my defense. Ridiculous or not
it's a valid concern.

~~~
tdfx
Yeah I would say it's not ridiculous to ask for, but would be ridiculous if
the judge granted it.

------
kanobo
He was so brazen in using identical schematic and suppliers. It amazing to
think all this is a result of the supplier getting confused from having two
clients with identical schematics and accidently cc'ing the wrong engineers.

------
credit_guy
I was thinking I'd read that the head of the Uber self-driving car division at
the time of the killing of Elaine Herzberg [1] is being pursued by prosecutors
for her wrongful death.

Instead, it's about some IP stuff.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Elaine_Herzberg](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Elaine_Herzberg)

~~~
Simulacra
From what I see in a cursory search, the back-up driver Rafaela Vasquez of the
self-driving car that killed Elaine Herzberg was looking at their phone most
of the time, which led to the fatal crash. I can't seem to find anything about
this person being charged with anything. IANAL: Would this not be involuntary
manslaughter at least?

~~~
ohples
Please don't use the word "accident" here. There was clearly negligence
involved.

~~~
justSayin000001
They are mutually exclusive, and both work in this case. You may not like it,
but by definition they both work.

------
joncrane
He apparently filed for bankruptcy because he "owes" $179 million to Google?

My question is, how is he paying his (presumably very expensive) lawyers?

~~~
ilikehurdles
If he's any smarter than me (and he clearly seems a lot smarter than me), he
probably keeps many of his assets in bankruptcy-protected accounts/LLCs.

~~~
alistairSH
Well, he did steal a bunch of stuff and get caught. That's not particularly
smart.

~~~
toomuchtodo
It’s okay to get caught (from a risk, not a moral perspective), it’s whether
it was worth it after the costs (time and money) are tallied. Doesn’t make you
dumb, it’s always a calculated risk if you’re considering a crime.

------
ilikehurdles
> Federal prosecutors are also seeking three years of supervised release and
> an agreed-upon restitution payment of nearly $756,500 to Alphabet Inc’s
> self-driving car company Waymo

> Levandowski filed for bankruptcy protection in March, shortly after a court
> confirmed that he must pay $179 million to Google to end a legal battle over
> his split from the Alphabet Inc unit.

I see is guilty of a few things, but the size of the fines seems astronomical.
Does the scope of his crime justify this punishment?

~~~
sadfev
No, it was blatant theft of IP and some might consider corporate espionage.

He was a high level exec at Waymo, who stole the IP which represented the core
competency just before he jumped ship to Uber.

~~~
qppo
> some might consider corporate espionage

I don't know about "consider," he plead guilty to theft of trade secrets and
was charged with crimes defined by the Economic Espionage Act.

But I think most engineers don't know that stealing IP from your former
employer is a federal crime punishable up to 10 years.

~~~
CydeWeys
Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Almost all engineers should at least know
that doing so is _wrong_. And this guy was an executive, not just an engineer.

~~~
qppo
I'm not suggesting that it's an excuse or that engineers don't know it's
wrong, just that I'm guessing most of them don't know they can _go to jail_
for pulling this shit.

It's kind of like what happened with Aaron Schwartz (where the ethics of what
he did might be more debatable than Levandowski). I don't think either of
these smart people realized what they were doing could put them in prison.

------
bloomboom
This is a great example of unequal prosecution. A startup that has its IP
copied illegally would be lucky to not be ignored by the feds. Even if it was
the proximate cause of a startup’s failure (which is admittedly rare).

But for Google and Goldman Sachs which never suffer any real damage in these
cases, the feds are their private army capable of raiding and imprisoning
anyone who copies some files illegally, even if they suffer no actual harm
whatsoever.

There is no question Google should be able to use the law to stop someone from
using their IP illegally and be compensated for any damages. But this attempt
to make an example out of someone just because they’re powerful is despicable.

The combination of powerful corporations with vendettas and prosecutors out to
make their bones is a huge flaw in our system.

~~~
raincom
Yes, "prosecutorial discretion" is one form in which corruption occurs.

~~~
refurb
Huh? The alternative is the prosecutor is required to prosecute everything
crime cops bring to them, no matter the evidence or likelihood of conviction.

Sounds worse than what we have now.

~~~
Nasrudith
It is comparable to bueracratic systems vs "feudal" appointees with
discretion. Despite the inefficiency, inflexibility, and occasional stupidity
from bueracracies historically they have been an improvement especially for
scalability. Essentially removing discretion would "bueracraticize" it
compared to a more fiefdom style prosecutorial discretion.

There is some potential long term improvement of forcing legislators to write
their laws better at the cost of far greater court load, travesties of
justice, and similiar in exchange for lessened corruption. The improvemrnt
part rests upon assumptions of outrage over the proper thing. Not the best of
track records given dumb knee-jerk laws.

So yeah, almost certainly worse short term but it may be better long term. Not
exactly an inspiring cause.

------
chx
One of those headlines where I was like "blimey, Uber made a detached head
self-drive!"

------
kbos87
So nice that they’ve decided this is what they want to go after the self-
driving division of Uber for, and not the gross negligence that led to a
woman’s death when their car plowed into her walking a bike across the street.

------
paledot
And sorry, what's Uber on the hook for here? Don't tell me they didn't know.

------
peteradio
Anyone can clarify what sensitive docs he took with him, citations
appreciated?

~~~
kanobo
[https://medium.com/waymo/a-note-on-our-lawsuit-against-
otto-...](https://medium.com/waymo/a-note-on-our-lawsuit-against-otto-and-
uber-86f4f98902a1)

\- 14,000 highly confidential and proprietary design files for Waymo’s various
hardware systems, including designs of Waymo’s LiDAR and circuit board \- 9.7
GB of Waymo’s highly confidential files and trade secrets, including
blueprints, design files and testing documentation. \- supplier lists,
manufacturing details and statements of work with highly technical information

------
misiti3780
so does he have to pay google/waymo back that 800K on top of the 179MM ?

------
tome
Top comment: unfairly lenient

Second-top comment: unfairly strict

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23989857](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23989857)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23989843](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23989843)

~~~
esoterica
It's kinda funny how the both the criticisms of the punishment as being too
strict and too lenient are being constructed from the same left-leaning
perspective.

1\. It's inequitable that white collar criminals face lower sentences than
blue collar criminals despite the nominal values involved being way higher

2\. It's inequitable that people are being threatened with years in prison for
non-violent property crimes against mega corporations.

~~~
ch4s3
I think there are a few different angles here for it being too strict.

1\. There's are large elements of randomness and bias in our legal system
which make it incredibly uncertain if someone will go to jail for a crime they
commit, and sentences are given at times months to years after a crime is
committed. This means long sentences provide only marginally more disincentive
than a shorter sentence.

2\. It is incredibly expensive to imprison people, so we should aim to keep
people jailed for the smallest amount of time necessary to protect society
and/or deter crime.

3\. It is simply inhumane to put any non-violent person in jail for a quarter
century.

4\. Corporatism incentivizes this kind of crime and society should address the
root of the problem rather than focus on people who respond to the perverse
incentives of systems we live in.

------
raiyu
White collar crime vs blue collar crime.

White collar crime steal $179MM of assets and get 27 months of home arrest.

Blue collar crime rob a bank to steal $10,000 and spend 10 years in prison.

~~~
jonathanjaeger
While this is a fair point (due to the difference in money), there is
something to be said about the trauma imposed on people who are witness to a
bank robbery, not to mention the potential lives hurt/lost if things go sour.
I'm not saying in your above example that the 27mo and 10yr sentences should
be shorter or longer, I'm just noting that there are reasons the two aren't
equal.

~~~
raiyu
Fair point, but the penalties for white collar crime are still very lax even
when "everyday" people are affected. Look at the last recession which led to
many "average" american families losing their homes. That wasn't possible
without fraud especially the ratings agencies that were giving out false
ratings and still no one went to prison.

~~~
jonathanjaeger
Yes I agree with you there. There are a whole host of blue collar crimes that
have too high a penalty as well. I'm not saying don't change the sentences.
Just noting the difference. I personally tried to convince multiple people
that insider trading should be illegal and prosecuted (example of white collar
crime that is hard to pinpoint someone who suffers directly). Between
libertarian-minded people and very left-wing people, it's hard to convince
some people I know that want to eliminate prisons (left) or regulations
(libertarians), that we should be handing out penalties for certain things,
let alone stiffer penalties. Prosecute fraud? I'm with you on that!

------
IMTDb
> “It is, unfortunately, no exaggeration to say that a prison sentence today
> can amount to the imposition of a serious health crisis, even a death
> sentence, given the BOP’s (Federal Bureau of Prisons) current inability to
> control the spread of the coronavirus,”

No exaggeration ? °-°

~~~
munk-a
Not a huge exaggeration - but I'd like to see some explanation of why that's
in any way relevant to the trial.

Maybe the DOJ should be requesting funds from congress to help improve prison
safety or even look at upscaling work-release programs - or maybe the
executive branch could pardon all those low level drug offenders and the DOJ
could finally remove mandatory sentencing rules around possession charges.
Maybe in this virus world centralized prisons aren't morally acceptable and we
need to look at smaller more integrated facilities for all but the max-
security folks.

But it doesn't matter for this dude's case, it's completely irrelevant. He can
take on the same risks that society deems appropriate for black kids who had a
joint behind their ear.

(edit: As I noted in a response actually yea, it is a huge exaggeration so I
don't disagree with the parent's point. I still personally prefer to tear down
the BS from the angle I noted above but yea the lawyer's numbers are also
totally BS)

~~~
IMTDb
If we consider p(him dying) = 1 if convicted to a death sentence. The point of
the lawyer if that p(him getting covid in prison) * p(him dying of covid as a
healthy 40 year old) ≈ 1.

If it's not a huge exaggeration, please run me through the numbers. Because
p(him dying of covid as a healthy 40 year old) < 0.015

I would love to pay those attorney's fee with few lottery tickets if that's
how this guy plays with statistics.

~~~
munk-a
That's fair yea - so I think there a few ways this lawyer's statements can be
proven to be nonsense.

The numbers in that formulary are mostly unknown so I'd be more comfortable
attacking the statement from the angle I outlined above but I agree the
numbers clearly don't match what the lawyer is implying.

------
DeonPenny
I'd do 27 months for millions of dollars. I might even do it for thousands of
dollars if you give me a computer and internet access.

------
dheera
Honest question here. Why are we, the taxpayers, paying for 27 months of free
housing and food for this guy?

Considering he's not a physical threat to society, only an intellectual one,
I'd much rather he be slapped with a financial punishment large enough to be
meaningful.

~~~
ttmb
So let's say I did the same thing. I don't have any money, so there is no
meaningful financial punishment that can be applied to me. In which case,
we'll need an alternate punishment, ie - jail.

In which case we've just set up a punishment system where poor people go to
jail and rich people don't.

~~~
manquer
That’s the difference between American view of prison as only punishment and
deterrent and not rehabilitation.

If a criminal is violent and needs to isolated from society or needs
rehabilitation programs skills training etc to live a moral /legal life then
perhaps prison can offer those .

Even with traditional non white collar crimes , like say prostitution or small
drug dealers offender are often victims as well , putting them in prison is
counter productive.

The punishment philosophy is based on the premise that punishment is an
deterrent and severe punishment will make people not break the law. This is
outdated view.

Decision making when committing a crime is not driven by fear of imprisonment.
People do not always make rational decisions , especially under the influence
of a substance . our risk perception and tolerance is not statistically
optimal plenty of games and tv shows revolve around this .

Logical reasoning arguments aside , on pure numbers rate of incarceration and
convictions, recidivism per capita in the U.S. is by far the highest in
developed economies and the difference is very stark compared to say Norway
where rehabilitation is the focus, famously prisons are so empty they rent it
out to other countries, a mass shooter complains about not having access to
latest play station.

I am not even touching on the problems with the slavery , for profit
incentives , the dis proportionate racial representation , racial /economic
sentencing biases for similar crimes in the U.S.

