UBER RESPONDS: Google claims about stolen record are a sum ‘misfire’

Travis Kalanick Anthony Levandowski
Uber CEO Travis Kalanick (right) and Uber executive
Anthony Levandowski


Uber has pronounced from a commencement that Google’s claims of
egghead skill burglary involving self-driving automobile technology
were “meritless”.

On Friday, Uber finally told a side of a story and laid out
a justification on given it believes a lawsuit brought by Waymo, a
Google spin out from a Alphabet-owned company, is a total

Uber is perplexing to stop a decider from crude a growth of
a self-driving automobile module by reporting that:

  • Its Lidar design, a pivotal member in self-driving cars,
    has a four-lens pattern compared to Waymo’s single-lens

    It also has dual visual cavities
    compared to Waymo’s one. 
  • The 14,000 files downloaded by Anthony Levandowski, a
    former Google worker and now conduct of Uber’s self-driving car
    program, never done it to Uber.
  • And Uber claims that Waymo didn’t immediately pronounce up
    when it schooled that Levandowski had downloaded a files in
    Oct 2016. It waited 5 months before asking for the
    justice for an injunction.

In February, Waymo
sued Uber
, claiming that Levandowski had stolen critical Lidar
record shortly before starting his possess self-driving company
(which Uber after acquired).

The trade secrets case is moulding adult to be one of the
many poignant and closely-watched battles in Silicon Valley in
years, pitting dual of a world’s many powerful companies,
and former partners, opposite any other.

Waymo has asked a decider to emanate a rough claim to
stop Uber from regulating any record that might have been built on
a exclusive information.

“Waymo’s claim suit is a misfire: there is no
justification that any of a 14,000 files in doubt ever touched
Uber’s servers and Waymo’s avowal that a multi-lens Lidar is
a same as their single-lens LiDAR is clearly false,” Uber’s
associate ubiquitous warn Angela Padilla pronounced in a statement. “If
Waymo honestly suspicion that Uber was regulating a secrets, it would
not have waited some-more than 5 months to find an injunction.
Waymo doesn’t accommodate a high bar for an injunction, that would
suppress a eccentric innovation—probably Waymo’s idea in the
initial place.”

The blank files and a ‘complicated situation’

The 14,000 files that Waymo claims Levandowski downloaded
onto a ride expostulate afterwards wiped purify from a mechanism sojourn a
adhering indicate in a case. 

“To be sure, Uber finds itself in a difficult situation: it is
unambiguously building a possess record eccentric of Waymo,
yet a worker Mr. Levandowski is indicted of downloading 14,000
files from Waymo before he assimilated Uber,” Uber’s lawyers write in
their argument. “Uber is blocked during this theatre from providing an
reason opposite that indictment given Mr. Levandowski has
asserted his Fifth Amendment inherent rights.”

In a arguments, Uber has steady that it can’t find evidence
of any of those files ever creation it to Uber, formed on searching
over 100 terabytes of data. Uber did concede that it found two
file on a personal, non-Uber owned device of a different
worker named in a complaint, yet it wasn’t one of a ones
allegedly downloaded by Levandowski and was usually used during his
time during Waymo.

However, Waymo has pushed behind opposite Uber’s faith that the
14,000 files never done it to Uber given they haven’t been able
to hunt Levandowski’s devices. Levandowski has beg a fifth
amendment opposite self-incrimination, and a justice is
now weighing either or not to concede it

“Uber’s avowal that they’ve never overwhelmed a 14,000
stolen files is treasonable during best, given their refusal to look
in a many apparent place: a computers and inclination owned by the
conduct of their self-driving program,” a Waymo orator said.
“We’re seeking a justice to step in formed on transparent justification that
Uber is using, or skeleton to use, a trade secrets to develop
their LiDAR technology, as seen in both circuit house blueprints
and filings in a State of Nevada.”

Clear justification or a misfire?

While Waymo claims there is “clear evidence” that Uber is
regulating or skeleton to use a trade secrets, Uber still believes that
Waymo’s bargain of a record is fatally

At a heart of a justification is a record called Lidar,
a laser-based complement that works identical to radar to concede cars to
“see” a universe around them. 

Waymo says that Uber is duplicating a designs and violating
a patents formed on blueprints it saw interjection to a wrongly-sent
email and a open annals ask in Nevada. Uber
says Waymo leapt to certain assumptions formed on a two
papers that it was building something similar, that isn’t
true, according to a ride-hailing giant.

“Waymo could not be some-more wrong, and Uber’s pattern could not
be some-more different,” Uber said.

Uber says a growth of a possess in-house LiDAR
record began approach before a merger of Otto, a company
Levandowski and a fast of ex-Waymo employees

Uber had hired many researchers from Carnegie Mellon
University in 2015 when it launched a Advanced
Technologies Center who began operative on building Uber’s LiDAR
systems. As partial of their research, Uber began building a
complement that had 4 lenses, not a single-lens complement that
Waymo uses. The plan had a codename “Fuji” after Mt.
Fuji in Japan.

Waymo has pronounced that plans in a email it perceived from
a retailer was a explanation it indispensable that Uber was regulating its
exclusive technology. 

“This email can't be a smoking gun Waymo claims it is,
given a assumptions Waymo draws from it are false,” Uber
argues. “For instance, Waymo regularly argues that the
pattern of a house necessitates a single-lens design,
that Uber does not use.”

Even yet it has been building a possess complement in-house,
Uber is still regulating usually commercially accessible systems purchased
from Velodyne for a cars on a road, a association says.

Saving itself

While Uber believes Waymo’s arguments that it’s regulating the
record is meritless, a claim it faces does sojourn a
vast hazard to a business, it concedes. 

So far, US District Judge William Alsup has pronounced that Uber
won’t be means to stop a claim if all Uber can contend is that
it can’t find a files. 

If all we can uncover is that we can’t find them in
your files, there’s going to be a rough claim of some
sort. It can’t be helped. You have got to do some-more than what you
are revelation me,” Alsup pronounced during a conference on

Uber believes yet that any claim could mistreat its
ability to be a “viable” business and potentially be a hazard to
open reserve given it believes self-driving cars prevent
accidents and save lives.

“To block Uber’s continued swell in a independent
growth of an in-house LiDAR that is essentially different
than Waymo’s, when Uber has not used any of Waymo’s trade
secrets, would block Uber’s efforts to sojourn a viable business,
suppress a talent and skill that are a primary drivers of
this rising industry, and risk loitering a doing of
record that could forestall automobile accidents,” Uber said.
“Ultimately, that would be damaging to a public.”

Get a latest Google batch price here.

Do you have an unusual story to tell? E-mail stories@tutuz.com