The Big Levandowski: Could an Uber Engineer's Indictment Discourage Workers From Changing Jobs? (newyorker.com) 41
Long-time Slashdot reader theodp writes: For nearly 20 years," writes WIRED's Alex Davies in How Anthony Levandowski Put Himself at the Center of an Industry, "the French-American Levandowski has played a kind of purposeful Forrest Gump for the world of autonomous driving. Rather than stumbling into the center of one momentous event after another, Levandowski has put himself there. And he has left a mixed trail in his wake: Former colleagues have described him as brilliant, engaging, motivating, fast-charging, inconsiderate, a weasel, and just plain evil. None, though, deny that whether for good or ill, the benefit of society or himself, Levandowski has played a propulsive role in the development of self-driving tech."
But that's of little comfort to Levandowski, who was charged by the Feds earlier this week with stealing driverless-vehicle technology from Alphabet Inc.'s Waymo unit, prompting the New Yorker's Charles Duhigg to explain How the Anthony Levandowski Indictment Helps Big Tech Stifle Innovation in Silicon Valley. The Economic Espionage Act of 1996, Duhigg notes, "was mostly intended to be used against overseas saboteurs, but it has largely been directed at American citizens -- and, in effect, has made federal prosecutors into heavies operating on behalf of disgruntled tech firms."
The definition of a 'trade secret' in the statute, Duhigg adds, is so broad that it could very well mean anything. Daniel Olmos, an attorney who has represented individuals accused of stealing trade secrets, once told Duhigg, "I get calls all the time from scared engineers, who once put some work stuff on their home computer so they could work on it after dinner, and now they're worried if they try to jump to another firm they're gonna get sued. And you know what? They're right to be worried.
But that's of little comfort to Levandowski, who was charged by the Feds earlier this week with stealing driverless-vehicle technology from Alphabet Inc.'s Waymo unit, prompting the New Yorker's Charles Duhigg to explain How the Anthony Levandowski Indictment Helps Big Tech Stifle Innovation in Silicon Valley. The Economic Espionage Act of 1996, Duhigg notes, "was mostly intended to be used against overseas saboteurs, but it has largely been directed at American citizens -- and, in effect, has made federal prosecutors into heavies operating on behalf of disgruntled tech firms."
The definition of a 'trade secret' in the statute, Duhigg adds, is so broad that it could very well mean anything. Daniel Olmos, an attorney who has represented individuals accused of stealing trade secrets, once told Duhigg, "I get calls all the time from scared engineers, who once put some work stuff on their home computer so they could work on it after dinner, and now they're worried if they try to jump to another firm they're gonna get sued. And you know what? They're right to be worried.
Who's apologizing for whom here? (Score:5, Insightful)
Um, Levandowski allegedly deliberately downloaded and transferred a very large amount of proprietary corporate files. This isn't some "suppression of innovation," this is theft pure and simple.
Re:Who's apologizing for whom here? (Score:5, Insightful)
True, but a perpetual state of victimhood is needed to keeping the tin-foil industry going.
Re: (Score:1)
The tin-foil industry is almost completely gone. I wish it wasn't, because it would be nice to have ready access to inexpensive tin-foil to use for RF and other signal shielding in electronics. Tin-foil solders quite nicely.
The ubiquitous aluminum foil we are stuck with these days pales in comparison.
Re: (Score:2)
The ubiquitous aluminum foil we are stuck with these days pales in comparison.
Wait - there is actually such a thing as "tinfoil", as in made of tin?
Or did I just get wooshed?
Re: Who's apologizing for whom here? (Score:1)
Howâ(TM)s it taste?
On second thought, I donâ(TM)t want to know.
I bet they are totally going to reward you though. They always reward loyalty.
Your corporatist lords and ladies wish to enslave (Score:1)
sure, this is a real threat (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a threat to engineers who download a huge amount of proprietary documents from their employer right before they leave and found a competing company.
Levandowski knew what he was doing (Score:2)
Unless you're working as a self-employed engineer, you have no rights to the IP of your former employer unless otherwise agreed, whether you copy it outright like Levandowski or whether you simply reproduce it from memory.
We engineers all know something about contract law, if you're looking to make a few million bucks and then move on, it behooves you to spend a few hundred on a lawyer first.
Myself, I've disagreed with contracts, you can scrap things out of your contract or add language before signing, espe
Re:Levandowski knew what he was doing (Score:5, Interesting)
Pray that they don't hire a lawyer that finds out that you've done that, or you'll be in a world of hurt.
1. Regardless of whether the VP signed the contract, adding terms and signing the contract makes it a counteroffer, not a completed contract. You'd better hope that they didn't keep a copy of the signed copy offered to you, and even then they can contest the effect of the added terms.
2. The alternative is not for you to maintain full copyright. If what you wrote was within the scope of your duties, they own it as a work made for hire, automatically. If you used their time or resources to write it, even as a side project, they still own it. All they have to do is haul you into state court and get an order for you to execute an assignment.
You'll not be spending a few hundred on a lawyer first. You'll be spending a few thousand, or more, on a lawyer afterwards. Negotiate your terms in the open, or you deserve everything that you'll get.
Re: (Score:2)
You confused yourself. If all the CEO sent was an offer to make a contract, and only received a counter offer to make a different contract, then no work for hire clause is in effect, and all rights remain with the author, law which is firmly and abundantly settled. I like OP's strategy, it's perfectly fine. Genius even.
Re: (Score:2)
If they've tendered payment and he's accept it, there's a contract. The terms of the contract are merely subject to dispute. A majority of employees work without being under a written contr
Re: (Score:2)
If they've tendered payment and he's accept it, there's a contract. The terms of the contract are merely subject to dispute.
Exactly. But not the contract you claim, and in particular, not either of the contracts written by the negotiating parties. What you have is simply a common law contract, and common law leaves copyright in the hands of the original author. Simple concept, do try to get it through your pretty head.
There certainly is no work for hire contract if both parties have not agreed to it. You argument would get laughed out of court, but feel free to get laughed at, I can only assume that is your purpose, since intell
Re: (Score:2)
In a "common law" contract an employer owns everything that you produce during your employment. Also, the copyright act supersedes "common law" in connection with copyrightable works, and I've already given you the section of copyright law that applies.
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, you claim to be a lawyer. Is that you, giving legal advice to the public, in a public forum? You think you're actually anonymous?
Just fucking with ya :)
Re: (Score:2)
Giving general opinions on the state of the law is not something that can get you UAPL discipline. If it were, people like you would be in even more jeopardy that I, because at least I have the virtue of being correct.
And if you had any delusions that I was representing you, well... nobody is going to buy that.
I'm quite comfortable that I'm within the lines and as anonymous
Re: (Score:2)
General opinion? No. You were giving legal advice. What a weasel.
Re: (Score:2)
Here's a compendium of UAPL laws and regs [americanbar.org]. Good luck finding one that applies. I'm not representing anyone, I'm not taking compensation, and I'm not mediating disputes.
Also, giving legal advice would require knowing the specifics of a particular factual situation and applying the law to it. You posts have no such facts. Just repeated pronouncements of what your gut feels the law ought to be. Well, the law isn't that either, and I'm not su
Re: (Score:3)
> Unless you're working as a self-employed engineer, you have no rights to the IP of your former employer unless otherwise agreed,
While this is true, it can be extremely misleading. Employer's rights to the intellectual property of their employees and contractors is often wildly overstated, and has been profoundly abused against employees. The art created by Jack Kirby the co-creator of many of Marvel's most profitable and famous characters alongside Stan Lee, is a classic example of such intellectual pr
The Real Reason Uber and Google Buried the Hatchet (Score:4, Interesting)
To paraphrase Boris Badenov [wikipedia.org], "First we get Uber IPO billions [reuters.com]. Then we get Levandowski." From The Real Reason Uber and Google Buried the Hatchet [vanityfair.com]: Uber C.E.O. Dara Khosrowshahi has been open about his plans to take Uber public in 2019. If Waymo had been able to convince a jury that its trade secrets were on Uber's servers, Uber would have suffered financially. Google is still an investor in Uber, one source noted, and it was to Google's benefit to preserve-and subsequently cash in on-Uber's I.P.O. "Waymo was already controlling the narrative surrounding the trial," a source close to Uber told me. "Both sides can reach a settlement and move on, and it hardly hurts Uber. When you think about an impending I.P.O. that Google has a stake in, everyone wins in this lawsuit, legal fees aside."
Don't do this: (Score:3)
> "who once put some work stuff on their home
> computer so they could work on it after dinner"
Sure, this is not *quite* as bad as doing side projects on your work machine. But DON'T do this! If you have or contribute to OS projects as a hobby, or if you do 1090 work on the side, or if you're knocking around your own startup idea, or whatever; you do NOT want your employer's IP intermingling with any of that on the same hardware. Even if you're never sued personally; many employment contracts have clause that give your employer a claim on anything you develop on any machine with their IP on it. And no one wants that. Sometimes these claims are of dubious legality, granted. But guess who has more money to spend on lawyers than you do?
Also... work like balance and all that... it's better for your sanity to leave the office at the office. But, if you just can't do so, FFS... just bring your work laptop home with you and do your extra work on it, NOT your personal machine.
Re: (Score:3)
> "who once put some work stuff on their home
> computer so they could work on it after dinner"
Sure, this is not *quite* as bad as doing side projects on your work machine. But DON'T do this! If you have or contribute to OS projects as a hobby, or if you do 1090 work on the side, or if you're knocking around your own startup idea, or whatever; you do NOT want your employer's IP intermingling with any of that on the same hardware. Even if you're never sued personally; many employment contracts have clause that give your employer a claim on anything you develop on any machine with their IP on it.
Recently, I had to explain to my cousin’s wife why he needs to buy a new laptop use to write software for his side business. She didn’t understand that anything he did on his corporate laptops was the asset of the company. She thought he was just wasting money when his main employer gave him two laptops to develop on.
Re: (Score:3)
I had an employer try "everything you do" belongs to the company, even if I don't use their equipment.
I pushed back and they expressed substantial surprise. Then they did provide an exception, in writing.
Re: (Score:2)
> I had an employer try "everything you do" belongs to
> the company, even if I don't use their equipment.
In California, that's explicitly illegal. If you're not here, perhaps you could check the laws of your state and see about getting that company slapped down. Here, at least, the state takes a fairly dim view of businesses trying to sleaze out on obeying labor laws. And depending on the specifics, you could possible get part of the settlement awarded to you.
But of course, once the code and hardwa
Re: (Score:2)
In my jurisdiction an employment contract can include such a thing. I negotiated it back out. No kittens were harmed.
Don't use personal equipment for work (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Isn't it safe to buy an inexpensive laptop that you own and restrict work content to that laptop, airgapped from your regular personal equipment? Obviously nobody wants to 'donate' a piece of hardware to their company, but firewalling work away like this could be a solution. If your company/ex-company contests the issue, surrender the $300 laptop to them.
Re: Don't use personal equipment for work (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Why? Just take the work laptop home or connect to a secured remote desktop sat on a work server.
If your employer doesn't offer those things, don't work from home.
Re: (Score:2)
No. Never use personal equipment for work. Never use work equipment for personal work, or to access personal online accounts of any kind.
Re: (Score:2)
They're still going to look at as your personal machine. Just by having the machine you almost certainly violated company policies related to copying their IP, and if you connected to their internal network that's almost certainly another violation. If they find out about it, they'd have grounds to fire you on the spot with cause if they wanted to. And if they only find about when you leave the company, they almost certainly aren't going to believe your pinky-swear that you only did work still on this co
Re: (Score:2)
Bingo. Keep your work separate from any personal stuff. Never use your work computer or work email, or even browser for ANY personal things, and vice versa. The only exception could be using your monitors/keyboard/mouse/printers - you can remote into a work laptop from a personal PC if you wish to take advantage of multiple monitors, printers, etc.
don't take code to a competitor (Score:2)
if it's something like code to manage servers no one is going to care
but don't take a paycheck writing algorithms for new tech and take that code to a competitor. memorize the summary, but don't copy the code.
Re: (Score:2)
>> if it's something like code to manage servers no one is going to care
They most certainly are going to care.
Back office and automation code can add just as much value to a company as their offered products. AWS is founded on the very type of IP you are mentioning.
Don't know all the details but... (Score:1)
I don't know all the details but my knee jerk reaction is that Google is the Big Evil in this, not The Big Levandowski, and that Google and its grasping, snotty founders are going to get their faces rubbed in the legal facts on this one.
Fuck Google, and Alphabet isn't even a thing.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know all the details but my knee jerk reaction is that Google is the Big Evil in this, not The Big Levandowski, and that Google and its grasping, snotty founders are going to get their faces rubbed in the legal facts on this one.
Fuck Google, and Alphabet isn't even a thing.
Yah, and fuck you too, hypocritical astromodding Googly asshole
Just Remember (Score:1)
Your company could do all manner of shitty things to you, and no one will ever have to worry about going to jail.
Rip off workers, they can get a lawyer. If they havenâ(TM)t signed an âarbitration agreementâ(TM).
They rip you off, Federal Prosecutors are on the case.
Itâ(TM)s personal responsibility for you. And ... only you.
And the hoooome ...
Of the ......
Brayayayayave ......
You know, if bravery i
So, don't put work IP on your personal computer (Score:2)
Just do not do it. Ever. There is no reason to do that. Ever.
The same thing goes for using your work laptop for personal tasks. ANY personal task.
If you are not 100% conformable handing your work laptop to a coworker and saying, "Hey I don't have time to look for that document right now, but it should be in the documents/projectxyz folder" you are doing it wrong.
Made engineers look bad. (Score:2)
Lots of people I know were really pissed off about this case because it shows how much industry gives to self-appointed "star" people who are in it only for themselves. Trying to motivate your individual contributors to put in the extra effort to get your project over the top and launched? Hope that big news doesn't break about how your company paid out millions to some douchbag con artist. Nothing motivates workers like hearing that they can't be paid more or have more resources because we're giving all