Autopilot and other Tesla info from Tesla's lawsuit against former employee

[bhzmark]

Full complaint at: http://www.autonews.com/assets/PDF/CA108767126.PDF

Highlights:

Not a good way to start a startup -- with a big fat (and apparently losing) litigation.

 

[lunitiks]

Just sadder than sad

 

[azred]

Greed is good.

--Gordon Gekko

 

[Andyw2100]

Not a good way to start a startup -- with a big fat (and apparently losing) litigation.

In the "Countergate" thread (Pack Performance and Launch Mode Limits) you have been a huge proponent for gathering facts, and not reaching conclusions before the facts are in. So I find it surprising that in this thread you are willing to write "(and apparently losing) litigation". Where are there any facts to support that? You have provided the information from one side of the two parties involved. I imagine the other party would have a different set of facts.

 

[stopcrazypp]

I'm not a lawyer, but it seems the guy signed a non-solicitation agreement when he was hired. It should be relatively straightforward to prove that he was doing solicitation of Tesla employees after he left if he really was doing that. There were other serious allegations like him copying a couple hundred GB of data before leaving, which should also be relatively straightforward to prove.

 

[lunitiks]

Hey man you can have your own opinions, your own points of view, and your own version of the story, but not your own *facts*!

If mr Anderson (not the Matrix one) took proprietary data, employees from Tesla and started a competing company, that's a matter of *facts*.

I do not know the governing laws but if these facts are true, I think the non-Matrix dude is in trouble

 

[Andyw2100]

I'm not a lawyer, but it seems the guy signed a non-solicitation agreement when he was hired. It should be relatively straightforward to prove that he was doing solicitation of Tesla employees after he left if he really was doing that. There were other serious allegations like him copying a couple hundred GB of data before leaving, which should also be relatively straightforward to prove.

As has been pointed out in another thread, the guy was technically savvy. Would it really make sense that he would leave such an easily traceable trail, if his intention were to do what he is accused of doing?

We're not going to be able to try this case here, on TMC. That's what the courts are for.

I just pointed out how hypocritical @bhzmark was being by demanding proof in one thread (and demanding this proof in a situation where it was difficult to obtain) yet turning around and being willing to condemn someone before --ANY-- proof is provided in another.

 

[Dax279]

Maybe there are "alternative facts"

 

[Andyw2100]

Hey man you can have your own opinions, your own points of view, and your own version of the story, but not your own *facts*!

If mr Anderson (not the Matrix one) took proprietary data, employees from Tesla and started a competing company, that's a matter of *facts*.

I do not know the governing laws but if these facts are true, I think the non-Matrix dude is in trouble

Are you serious?

There are no "facts", yet. Tesla asserts Anderson did some things. Anderson asserts he didn't. This will be settled in the courts.

My "opinion" is that allegations made in a lawsuit are not "facts" until they are proven. Apparently you think differently. One of us is right about that, and "the facts" (also known as principles of law) indicate that it's not you.

 

[lunitiks]

Agree

 

[PDFS]

When I was a young attorney an older attorney passed along the best piece of knowledge. There is your client's story/facts, the other sides story/facts and they both believe they are right and somewhere in the middle lies the truth.

 

[stopcrazypp]

As has been pointed out in another thread, the guy was technically savvy. Would it really make sense that he would leave such an easily traceable trail, if his intention were to do what he is accused of doing?

We're not going to be able to try this case here, on TMC. That's what the courts are for.

I just pointed out how hypocritical @bhzmark was being by demanding proof in one thread (and demanding this proof in a situation where it was difficult to obtain) yet turning around and being willing to condemn someone before --ANY-- proof is provided in another.

I think you are being a bit optimistic about that. Judging from the history of TMC, we very much will try a case here, even with little or no verified information. That's just the nature of TMC.

 

[bonnie]

I think you are being a bit optimistic about that. Judging from the history of TMC, we very much will try a case here, even with little or no verified information. That's just the nature of TMC.

But that doesn't make it right.

I agree that 'trial by forum' is pretty common on TMC. But I hope we see some maturity from fellow forum members on this one - at least hoping people remember that everything is 'alleged' and recognize none of us yet have the facts. We're not talking companies here, we're talking about an individual. Let him have his day in court before we decide to completely trash his reputation.

Two things struck me on the complaint - 1) you don't get to Sterling's level (reporting directly to Elon) in the tech industry (or any others, for that matter) by gaining a reputation for stealing IP - that's a career limiting move, and, 2) the accusations that he sloppily changed timestamps just doesn't fit with his technical expertise. I balance what I know of Sterling against how much I admire Tesla and the people who work there. So for obvious reasons, I'm just waiting for this to all play out.

Kudos to Andy for speaking up against the tide.

 

[Andyw2100]

I think you are being a bit optimistic about that. Judging from the history of TMC, we very much will try a case here, even with little or no verified information. That's just the nature of TMC.

Well, I said "we're not going to be able to try this case here, on TMC." The word "able" implies both accurately and appropriately. I never said people weren't going to try! And yes, I am an optimist.

 

[Andyw2100]

Kudos to Andy for speaking up against the tide.

Thanks, Bonnie!

 

[stopcrazypp]

But that doesn't make it right.

I agree that 'trial by forum' is pretty common on TMC. But I hope we see some maturity from fellow forum members on this one - at least hoping people remember that everything is 'alleged' and recognize none of us yet have the facts. We're not talking companies here, we're talking about an individual. Let him have his day in court before we decide to completely trash his reputation.

Two things struck me on the complaint - 1) you don't get to Sterling's level (reporting directly to Elon) in the tech industry (or any others, for that matter) by gaining a reputation for stealing IP - that's a career limiting move, and, 2) the accusations that he sloppily changed timestamps just doesn't fit with his technical expertise. I balance what I know of Sterling against how much I admire Tesla and the people who work there. So for obvious reasons, I'm just waiting for this to all play out.

Kudos to Andy for speaking up against the tide.

Well, I said "we're not going to be able to try this case here, on TMC." The word "able" implies both accurately and appropriately. I never said people weren't going to try! And yes, I am an optimist.

Fair point from both. Personally, I won't be making judgement until all the facts are established.

 

[lunitiks]

 

[Matias]

The fact is, that we don't know the facts. Maybe Anderson stole the information, maybe he didn't.

The others fact is, that we will never find out, if he really stole the information or not. Eventually we will get some court decision, but that decision, what ever it will be, won't state, what is the truth.

 

[SR22pilot]

The charge of taking data is the more serious one. Recruiting employees can be difficult to prove. I'm not a lawyer but if I understand it correctly:

1) illegal - Still employed you say "Hey Bob, I'm going to start a company and want you to be part of it."
2) legal - You leave. Bob calls and asks what you are doing. You tell him and he asks to be part.
3) legal - you are leaving to form a company. An investor knows Bob and recruits him. The key here is that the investor knew Bob without you telling the investor to recruit Bob.
4) legal - you work with an ex employee to form a new company. That employee is past the non compete term (2years?) and recruits Bob before you even leave.

The lawyers can chime in if this is correct. I'll reserve judgement till I know more.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

The fact is, that we don't know the facts. Maybe Anderson stole the information, maybe he didn't.

The others fact is, that we will never find out, if he really stole the information or not. Eventually we will get some court decision, but that decision, what ever it will be, won't state, what is the truth.

Indeed. There are views about what the facts are, but those views are sometimes opposites and contested.

Even the alternative facts comment in publicity a week ago was twisted beyond recognition, though of course it was also a stupid comment because it gave others unnecessary ammunition.

Certainly there are often in many cases many alternative views to what the facts are - and sometimes they will forever remain a little (or a lot) uncertain.

That doesn't stop a lot of people from trying to assert their viewpoint as a fact, though. As can be seen in #6 and #8, when you hasten to own the facts (no matter if that really is the truth), others who disagree can then ridiculed as having "alternative facts".

It is a tactic that, though sometimes unintentional, certainly works.

Also, many pseudo sciences (e.g. astrology) are based on establishing facts that are never be contested, never change. A basis of real science is all facts can be contested, because in the end they are all just hypothesis, i.e. while a fact is a fact, we can never be quite sure if our view of it is completely correct.