Skip to Main Content
Ahead of the Curve Auto Supplier
BlogsPublications | July 19, 2017
5 minute read
Ahead of the Curve Auto Supplier

Waymo v. Uber – A Cautionary Tale

Earlier this year, Google subsidiary Waymo, LLC filed suit against Uber in federal court in California, alleging that Uber misappropriated trade secrets related to Waymo’s self-driving vehicle technology. The facts, as alleged by Waymo, are fairly juicy (as far as legal cases go) and they implicate a plethora of legal issues beyond just trade secret misappropriation. 

To give you some background, Waymo is the self-driving vehicle division of Google’s parent company, Alphabet, Inc., and has been developing self-driving vehicle technology since 2009. It recently partnered with Lyft, seemingly with the ultimate aim of introducing a fleet of automated vehicles. Uber has likewise been developing self-driving vehicle technology with the same end-game in mind, putting these two entities on a competitive collision course. 
 
Waymo has developed its own Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) system. LiDAR is laser technology mounted to the exterior of a self-driving vehicle that creates a real-time 3D image of the vehicle’s surroundings; essentially, it allows the vehicle to “see” its surroundings so it can navigate as a human driver would (perhaps even better, according to the complaint). Waymo alleges that its particular LiDAR technology is more cost-efficient than others, making it a competitive advantage for the company. 
 
And now, to the more sensational part of the story: Waymo claims that one of its former engineers, Anthony Levandowski, downloaded 14,000 confidential files from Waymo shortly before leaving the company without notice in January 2016 to form his own self-driving truck start-up, Ottomotto. In August 2016, Uber purchased Ottomotto for $680 million and, thereafter, put Levandowski in charge of Uber’s entire self-driving vehicle division. Then, in December 2016, a Waymo employee was mistakenly copied on an email from a LiDAR component supplier to Uber. The email attached drawings of a LiDAR circuit board that was strikingly similar to Waymo’s own LiDAR technology. Naturally, Waymo claims that the drawing was in fact its LiDAR circuit board, information it claims is a trade secret and was among the information that Levandowski wrongfully downloaded before he left the company. To see all of Waymo’s allegations against Uber, you can view the complaint here.
 
The case is currently set for trial in October of this year. If Waymo is successful, it will maintain whatever leg-up on the industry that its cost-efficient LiDAR technology gives it, and could be the first to introduce a fleet of self-driving vehicles for ride-sharing. 
 
This case presents a multitude of legal issues. Here are a few of the most interesting:

    Among other things, Waymo will have to show that Uber actually acquired Waymo’s trade secret. So far, Waymo has been unable to locate the 14,000 documents Levandowski stole from Waymo on Uber’s servers. Waymo insists that correspondence between Levandowski and Uber indicate a “cover-up” and Uber maintains it never received any of the downloaded files.

    Even if it can ultimately show Uber’s acquisition of the files, Waymo will also have to demonstrate that the information in question is actually a trade secret. And, it will be necessary to show that the information was subject to reasonable efforts to maintain its secrecy – such as appropriate technological safeguards, encryption methods and/or security clearances. 

    This case serves as a cautionary tale for suppliers, reminding them that in today’s automotive industry, where innovative technology and talent are more valuable than ever, the importance of thorough due diligence and the need for implementation of robust security measures to protect company trade secrets and other confidential information cannot be overstated.
     
    Warner Norcross attorneys consult clients every day on these matters. To learn how to protect your company against these pitfalls, contact one of our Automotive Industry Group attorneys.