Nerdy Worlds of Law and Engineering Collide on Day 4 of 'Waymo v. Uber'
On Thursday afternoon, the fourth day of the high-profile trade secrets showdown between Waymo and Uber, the professional differences between lawyers and engineers were on stark display.
February 08, 2018 at 06:35 PM
3 minute read
SAN FRANCISCO — Lawyers and engineers occupy professional worlds which have their own distinct codes, quirks and vocabularies.
Thursday afternoon, on the fourth day of the high-profile trade secrets showdown between Waymo and Uber, the professional differences between lawyers and engineers were on stark display, particularly during the testimony of Waymo engineer Sasha Zbrozek.
Zbrozek, who managed one of Waymo's file servers central to the case, wrote emails that attorneys for both sides raised in opening statements Monday. In them, Zbrozek appeared to downplay the value of the 14,000-plus Waymo files former engineer Anthony Levandowski downloaded from the server shortly before he left Google to found a company later acquired by Uber.
“It was considered low-value enough that we had even considered hosting it off of Google infrastructure,” Zbrozek wrote in an October 2016 email to Waymo outside counsel Thomas Gorman at the firm then known as Keker & Van Nest. Zbrozek later wrote to in-house counsel at Google that it made him “uncomfortable” to think lawyers were ascribing a value to the number of files Levandowski downloaded.
Waymo attempted to defang the potentially damaging emails by calling Zbrozek and addressing them head-on. Taking the stand, Zbrozek took the peculiar step of spelling his name using the phonetic alphabet popular with ham radio operators, possibly a nod to noted ham enthusiast U.S. District Judge William Alsup, who is overseeing the case.
Under questioning from Duane Lyons of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, Zbrozek explained that the server in question was designed so that anyone logging in would automatically download the entire repository of files containing Google's working designs for a driverless car. He also explained that when he made those comments about being “uncomfortable” with lawyers making a big deal about the number of files downloaded, he wasn't aware that Levandowski had apparently copied the files to an external storage device and uploaded them to his personal laptop.
Asked about his comment that the sever's contents were “low-value,” Zbrozek said that traditionally at Google, user data, software code and algorithms have been considered high value. “The hardware [at all levels] was a second class citizen,” he wrote in a later email. “Maybe opinions have changed.”
On cross-examination, Uber's lawyer, Arturo González of Morrison & Foerster, asked if anyone at Google had suggested it was a bad idea to design the server so anyone logging on would download all the files.
“Uh, no,” Zbrozek said.
“Your employer is alleging there are trade secrets in there,” González said.
Zbrozek replied that he hadn't paid attention to what was in the lawsuit.
“I don't know what a trade secret is,” Zbrozek added later, noting that he has been trying to avoid learning the legal definition.
González closed his examination by walking Zbrozek through an email he received from Google in-house lawyer Shana Stanton just a day before Waymo filed suit. Stanton wrote that Waymo wanted to be able to say the server “contains only internal confidential stuff.”
González noted that Stanton was watching in the courtroom from the front row near the jury. He then proceeded to point out that she had copied the message to litigation counsel at Quinn Emanuel, including other lawyers in the courtroom.
Zbrozek recognized Stanton after she was pointed out, but didn't recognize the Quinn Emanuel lawyers.
“I don't know where they're from,” Zbrozek said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllIn Lawsuit, Ex-Google Employee Says Company’s Layoffs Targeted Parents and Others on Leave
6 minute readMorrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250