That is related, and the Tyto thing is arguably not shitty in the context of this case, given Leandowski's improper affiliation with Tyto while he was at Google was one of the pieces of the case. It's hard to say they got cheated or something when he basically controlled both companies.
> Specifically, Uber was aware that Mr. Levandowski had facilitated the relationship
between Tyto’s founder and its investor, a holding company managed by Mr. Stojanovski that
invested funds provided by two irrevocable trusts formed for the benefit of Mr. Levandowski’s
children, and would visit Tyto and his friends at that company to talk about technical and
business matters from time to time. Uber was also aware of Pierre Droz’ (a Google employee)
allegations that Mr. Levandowski was involved with Tyto and even deposed him extensively on
that very topic during the Waymo litigation.
Part of Google's claims (rightly, imo, though ianal) was that Levandowski had a stake or outright controlled Tyto while he was at Google and before he had even formed Otto.
Just before your quoted section shows how shady the whole thing was.
>Uber’s claims were false. Uber accepted Mr. Levandowski’s tender of indemnity
only after Google’s commencement of the arbitration proceeding alleging claims relating to Tyto
and only after Mr. Levandowski had been interviewed by Uber extensively about Google’s
allegations relating to Tyto. In addition, Mr. Levandowski’s devices given to Stroz had extensive
information about Tyto on them. And Stroz had specifically identified other materials on Mr.
Levandowski’s devices that he had not disclosed during interviews.
This is basically Uber saying (among other things) "yeah, we didn't know you were connected to Odin Wave/Tyto that Google is making claims about, that's outside the indemnity agreement."
> Specifically, Uber was aware that Mr. Levandowski had facilitated the relationship between Tyto’s founder and its investor, a holding company managed by Mr. Stojanovski that invested funds provided by two irrevocable trusts formed for the benefit of Mr. Levandowski’s children, and would visit Tyto and his friends at that company to talk about technical and business matters from time to time. Uber was also aware of Pierre Droz’ (a Google employee) allegations that Mr. Levandowski was involved with Tyto and even deposed him extensively on that very topic during the Waymo litigation.
Part of Google's claims (rightly, imo, though ianal) was that Levandowski had a stake or outright controlled Tyto while he was at Google and before he had even formed Otto.
Just before your quoted section shows how shady the whole thing was.
>Uber’s claims were false. Uber accepted Mr. Levandowski’s tender of indemnity only after Google’s commencement of the arbitration proceeding alleging claims relating to Tyto and only after Mr. Levandowski had been interviewed by Uber extensively about Google’s allegations relating to Tyto. In addition, Mr. Levandowski’s devices given to Stroz had extensive information about Tyto on them. And Stroz had specifically identified other materials on Mr. Levandowski’s devices that he had not disclosed during interviews.
This is basically Uber saying (among other things) "yeah, we didn't know you were connected to Odin Wave/Tyto that Google is making claims about, that's outside the indemnity agreement."
And his response is "Oh no, you totally knew"