Uber v Waymo latest: Google spinoff refused access to Uber internal doc hunt details

Wall of silence remains, albeit with a couple of holes

By Gareth Corfield

Posted in Emergent Tech, 12th September 2017 18:22 GMT

An American judge has denied Google’s self-driving car offshoot Waymo access to details of how Uber hunted for allegedly stolen documents handed to it by former Waymo employee Anthony Levandowski.

The attempt to secure discovery came as part of the long-running American court battle between Waymo – owned by Google daddy Alphabet Inc – and controversial taxi app Uber.

In spite of Waymo’s insistence that evidence was being withheld, Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley, sitting in the US District Court for Northern California, ruled:

“Waymo’s insistence that it is entitled to all privileged communications regarding Uber’s efforts to get Mr Levandowski to return Waymo’s files is unpersuasive and unsupported by citation to any authority.”

Legal news website Law360 reported [paywalled] that some disclosure from Uber had been ordered by the judge, relating to two letters. One was from Uber to Levandowski, banning him from working on LIDAR sensor tech, while the other formally notified him that he had been sacked by Uber.

Waymo is suing Uber for theft of trade secrets. A former Google/Waymo employee, Levandowski left the self-driving car unit to set up his own autonomous vehicle company, Ottomotto, which was bought by Uber for $680m. He allegedly took more than 14,000 documents with him when he quit Waymo, which at the time was still an integral part of Google rather than a standalone venture.

Though he is not named as a defendant, Levandowski has pleaded the 5th Amendment and refused to testify. He has since been fired from Uber after not producing various documents that the parties alleged he held. A judge in an earlier hearing declared:

“If Uber were to threaten Levandowski with termination for noncompliance, that threat would be backed up by only Uber’s power as a private employer, and Levandowski would remain free to forfeit his private employment to preserve his Fifth Amendment privilege.” ®

Sign up to our NewsletterGet IT in your inbox daily

Post a comment

More from The Register

'Don't Google Google, Googling Google is wrong', says Google

Chocolate Factory unwraps developer style guide, squibs the thorny ISO date debate

Google fuels up Chromecast Wi-Fi flooding fix

It lands today

US judges say you can Google Google, but you can't google Google

The Chocolate Factory is spared the aspirin treatment by the 9th Circuit Court

Windows Store nixed Google Chrome 'app' hours after it went live

Installer merely redirected to the official source

OK Google: A stranger with stash of pirated films is spamming my Google Team Drive

For the love of cloud, don't click on anything

Google's 'QUIC' TCP alternative slow to excite anyone outside Google

Multiplexing-over-UDP idea has hit the standards track, but is mostly ignored

Google's cell network Project Fi charged me for using Wi-Fi – lawsuit

Ad giant billed subscribers for Wi-Fi data, punters claim

1,900 rotten apps bounced out of Google Play every day in 2017

Developers, developers, developers – sigh – 100,000 of them were booted too!

Google kicks itself out of its own cache when serving AMP pages

Google.com URLs for stories published elsewhere are on the way out

Team Trump goes in to bat for Google and Facebook

What swamp?