Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Businesses Google The Courts Technology

Uber Threatens To Fire Engineer Accused of Stealing Trade Secrets From Waymo (gizmodo.com) 39

Uber's general counsel Salle Yoo has warned Anthony Levandowski that if he doesn't return the files he's accused of stealing from Google's self-driving car unit and using them to develop similar technology at Uber, or open deny taking them, he could be fired. Gizmodo reports: Uber's general counsel Salle Yoo warned Levandowski in a letter sent Monday and made public last night that, if he didn't return the stolen files or openly deny taking them, he could be fired. The letter is a result of a court order issued Monday, and Levandowski has until the end of the month to comply. "We understand that this letter requires you to turn over information wherever located, including but not limited to, your personal devices, and to waive any Fifth Amendment protection you may have," Yoo wrote. "While we have respected your personal liberties, it is our view that the Court's Order requires us to make these demands of you." Despite the allegations against him, Levandowski's job at Uber has been protected so far by his reputation as a rising star in the self-driving industry and his close friendship with CEO Travis Kalanick, who called Levandowski his brother from another mother. However, Yoo's letter hints that the tide at Uber may be turning against Levandowsk -- in addition to demanding he return Waymo's documents, Yoo also asks Levandowski to return any Uber files he may have and to only use Uber-issued devices for work, where his actions will be monitored. "If you have not fully complied with our prior request to return all Uber-owned documents in your possession, custody, or control, you must immediately return all such documents to us," Yoo wrote.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Uber Threatens To Fire Engineer Accused of Stealing Trade Secrets From Waymo

Comments Filter:
  • He already got the $250-or-so millions in Uber stock...
  • We understand that this letter requires you to turn over information wherever located, including but not limited to, your personal devices, and to waive any Fifth Amendment protection you may have,

    Last I checked a Judge CANNOT issue an Order demanding someone to Waive a constitutional right.
    Waiving a constitutional right can be offered as a voluntary option for a settlement, not as an Involuntary requirement demanded by a judicial order.

    • Last I checked a Judge CANNOT issue an Order demanding someone to Waive a constitutional right.

      This is civil litigation. The 5th Amendment is for criminal cases.

    • by geoskd ( 321194 ) on Friday May 19, 2017 @07:04PM (#54452019)

      Last I checked a Judge CANNOT issue an Order demanding someone to Waive a constitutional right.

      The Judge didn't. Uber told Levandowski to waive his 5th amendment rights in regards to this case or they will terminate his employment. Given the court case surrounding the very issue that he is required to waive his rights, Uber is perfectly within the law to make the demand of Levandowski. If he did not violate the law, then waiving his rights in that regard will have no effect on him. If he did break the law, then he is in violation of his contract with Uber anyways, so they have the right to fire him on those grounds. This is simply Ubers only legal way to prod him to undo the legal jamb he put the company in.

    • by DaHat ( 247651 )

      Like the police, lawyers not representing you don't have to tell the truth when trying to get you to do something which may or may not be beneficial to you.

      Remember, Salle Yoo is Uber's general counsel who is representing the company... not a single employee, and this action makes perfect sense as it creates even more groundwork for with-cause termination and perhaps claw-back of some benefits.

    • The letter didn't come from a judge. Learn some basic reading comprehension, you trisomic knackerbag.

  • He wrote: "or open deny taking them"

    In the quoted bit it's in actual English, like with an adverb and shit: "or openly deny taking them"

    Now any person with an IQ greater than his pant size would have simply copied & pasted it. So he either hasn't worked how to do that, or he thought there was an error there and "corrected" it.

    The fact that it's pointless, lame, and bad style to repeat (almost) yourself like that is another issue for another time.

  • Threatened? Makes you think that something is really serious here. Even government contractors will typically summarily terminate people who pull an ethical lapse of this scope with client regulations or civil law.

    • by Imrik ( 148191 )

      Unless there is public pressure, companies will not usually fire someone who may or may not have done something. The threat is to make him actually say that he didn't steal them, waiving his fifth amendment rights in the process. If it turns out that he did steal them, he'll get fired regardless.

  • If these two assholes can find each other I guess the saying is true, there really is someone out there for everyone.

1: No code table for op: ++post

Working...