
Levandowski agrees to plea deal over Google secrets - htiek
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-uber-autonomous-levandowski/former-uber-self-driving-head-levandowski-agrees-to-plea-deal-over-google-secrets-idUSKBN21646I
======
martey
After reading the comments here, I think it might be better to move the source
article to another one with more historical context, like
[https://www.theverge.com/2020/3/19/21187651/anthony-
levandow...](https://www.theverge.com/2020/3/19/21187651/anthony-levandowski-
pleads-guilty-google-waymo-uber-trade-secret-theft-lawsuit)

Things I learned from that article that aren't apparent in this one:

\- Uber was forced to pay more than $244 million to Waymo in the separate
lawsuit between them.

\- The $179 million that Levandowski owes to Google comes from a third lawsuit
between him and Google over poaching engineers from Waymo.

Update:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22633861](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22633861)
suggests that the article is being shadow edited. It now contains information
on those two points, but I don't think it did when many of the comments on
here were written.

------
goatherders
Even if they dont "use" anything he stole, 30 months of someone else's life in
jail is a zero price to pay for Uber to get even a small amount of competitive
knowledge. Even something like an internal calendar of expected timelines
would be super useful and cant be unseen.

~~~
irjustin
I'd argue the opposite that this was extremely expensive for Uber.

The legal nightmare which resulted a loss in 0.34% of equity and combined with
having to throw away whatever they had[0] before as part of the deal with
Google is not cheap at all.

Anecdotally, I have engineering friends on the Uber self driving team and they
talk about how they are just starting over again and how far behind they are
as a result of it.

This is definitely a path Uber would not choose to go down again in hind
sight. All to say, Uber did pay a significant price for "30 months of someone
else's life".

[0] [https://www.wired.com/story/uber-waymo-lawsuit-
settlement/](https://www.wired.com/story/uber-waymo-lawsuit-settlement/)

~~~
CobrastanJorji
It's a gamble, though. Say you're Uber's CEO, Travis Kalanick, and you believe
3 things for sure: 1. Uber's completely doomed if self-driving cars show up
and Uber doesn't own it, 2. Sexual harassment is a good idea, and 3. Uber's
behind the top players in self-driving car research.

Say you believe that there's a 25% chance that this Google guy can get you to
the front of the self-driving car race, and there's a 50% chance you'll get
caught. Based on those 3 assumptions at the top, this is a worthwhile risk.

Sure, he wouldn't do it again with hindsight, both because it didn't work out
and because his board fired him for creating a culture of sexual harassment,
but the risk was probably worth it, strategically if not ethically.

~~~
gowld
> 25% chance that this Google guy can get you to the front of the self-driving
> car race

This is the absurd assumption

------
ehsankia
Does he still owe any of the $179M to Google or does that go away? Is he still
in bankrupcy?

~~~
mannykannot
If that amount is for civil damages, I think that would be a separate matter,
but the last two paragraphs of the article leave little doubt that he is, and
that Uber is not picking up the tab unless he can force them to (...would it
be in the interests of Google (Alphabet? Waymo?) to help him do so? It would
hurt Uber. Could it do so, if it wanted to, e.g. by hiring lawyers on his
behalf?)

Update: The article has just been shortened, and the paragraphs on that issue
have been removed...

Update 2: they are back again, apparently slightly reworded, IIRC the
original...

~~~
ehsankia
> Update: The article has just been shortened, and the paragraphs on that
> issue have been removed...

I thought I was going crazy. I could swear it mentioned it but now it's gone.

> Update 2: they are back again, apparently slightly reworded, IIRC the
> original...

Not for me? It's gone still.

------
s3r3nity
Curious to hear from those who have been following the details more closely:
was there _any_ legal basis to Levandowski's claims?

It's easy to write him off as an extremely greedy sociopath, but I wonder if
he was walking along some precarious line or "loop-hole" that eventually too
many attempts to cross bit him in the butt.

~~~
asdfasgasdgasdg
No, there is no legal basis for using corporate resources for personal gain.
It's not a gray area, it's a bright line.

~~~
C1sc0cat
No poaching agreements are a bit more of a grey area though

------
foolfoolz
great example of how white collar crime does not get punished. “no more than
30 months” for a theft implicated at multi-billion dollar values. that’s even
less with good behavior credit

~~~
bosswipe
Two and half years is a hell of a lot of jail time. I seriously wouldn't wish
it on my worst enemy.

~~~
wtvanhest
People have gotten used to ridiculously long sentences, but 2 years in jail
would be absolutely terrible.

Think of it this way, people are currently SIP and going stir crazy with all
the modern stuff.

------
seibelj
After admitting his guilt and serving his time, would you refuse to work with
him again? It seems like he was a brilliant guy who made a bad mistake. I
don’t think he’s unemployable. Isn’t prison punishment enough? Time is the
only irreplaceable resource we have.

~~~
agoodthrowaway
Seriously? What exactly is brilliant about stealing designs? If he was so
brilliant, he’d know what to do better or differently. He’d have been able to
work around Google’s IP. That’s true brilliance.

Not only is he a thief, by his own admission, but it probably wasn’t the first
time he did this. The way he stole the designs he wasn’t worried about getting
caught. This is not something someone does for the first time. It’s a pattern
of behavior built up over a long time.

I’m seriously worried about the lack of basic morals in technology where
behavior like this, like Andy Rubin’s, etc.... goes unpunished because these
people are “brilliant.”

~~~
MrSandman
Did you read any of the news articles? This isn't about stealing designs...

~~~
agoodthrowaway
He downloaded schematics and pcba designs, documents, etc, onto a thumb drive
and transferred those contents outside of Google. Call it whatever you want.
It’s called theft.

* The files that Levandowski is alleged to have stolen contain drawings and schematics pertaining to circuitry and LIDAR laser-sensors that were used in Google’s self-driving cars. If convicted, he faces a maximum of 10 years in prison and $250,000 fine, plus restitution, for every count.*

[https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/27/20835368/google-uber-
engi...](https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/27/20835368/google-uber-engineer-
trade-theft-secrets-anthony-levandowski-charged)

~~~
MrSandman
Why are you pulling from an article from last August? There is news happening
in real-time about this with updates. The DOJ dropped all those charges. If
they could have proven it they wouldn't have allowed a plea. He was accused
not convicted...He plead because he's bankrupt from a civil suit with Google
and the DOJ let it drop because their case isn't strong enough. Look at the
Fitbit case. And funny enough - GOogle went on to buy them just a few months
after.

