The ride-hailing organization said in a court documenting Friday that Waymo, in the past known as Google's self-driving auto unit, has wrongly accused Uber of stealing prized formulas to build up its autonomous cars.
Uber also asked the court to deny Waymo's request for an order against Uber's self-driving auto program and said Waymo's accusations were "demonstrably false."
The core of Waymo's lawsuit, recorded in February, is the case that a previous Google worker, Anthony Levandowski, stole 14,000 "exceedingly secret" files before he cleared out to establish his own particular self-driving trucking startup. Uber purchased the startup, Otto, last year.
Levandowski built up Waymo's lidar innovation, a key segment in self-driving cars that lets the vehicles "see" their surroundings and distinguish movement, pedestrians, bicyclists and different obstacles. The organization asserted that the stolen data has profited Uber as it's created its own particular driverless auto tech.
In its court documenting, Uber said its lidar innovation is "in a general sense distinctive" from Waymo's.
"Waymo's order movement is a misfire: there is no confirmation that any of the 14,000 files in question at any point touched Uber's servers and Waymo's assertion that our multi-lens LiDAR is the same as their single-lens LiDAR is unmistakably false," Angela Padilla, associate general counsel at Uber, said in a statement. "On the off chance that Waymo truly suspected that Uber was using its secrets, it would not have held up over five months to seek an order. Waymo doesn't meet the high bar for an order, which would stifle free advancement and rivalry."
This is the first run through Uber has freely laid out its side of the case since Waymo's February recording of the suit, which is being heard in the District Court for the Northern District of California.
Setting two of Silicon Valley's biggest tech titans against each other, this high-stakes lawful showdown seems like something out of a spy novel. It centers on Waymo's claims that Uber supposedly stole secret self-driving auto innovation and includes everything from accusations of
In the recording, Uber said it searched its computers and didn't discover any of the files in question.
Waymo said Uber isn't searching in the opportune place.
"Uber's assertion that they've never touched the 14,000 stolen files is disingenuous, best case scenario, given their refusal to look in the most obvious place: the computers and devices claimed by the leader of their self-driving project," a Waymo spokeswoman said in a statement. "We're asking the court to step in based on clear confirmation that Uber is using, or plans to use, our competitive advantages to build up their LiDAR innovation, as seen in both circuit board blueprints and filings in the State of Nevada."
Uber also said in its documenting that it's depending on an outsider producer, Velodyne Lidar, for its lidar innovation, instead of its own in-house design like Waymo does.
Shroud, knife, self-driving auto
Levandowski left Google in January 2016. After four months, he helped to establish Otto, which was then procured by Uber in August for $680 million.
"Mr. Levandowski took phenomenal efforts to assault Waymo's design server and afterward cover his activities," reads Waymo's unique protestation.
Waymo said it scholarly of the charged burglary after a supplier unintentionally messaged a Waymo representative an outline of Uber's lidar dashboard.
"This circuit board bears a striking resemblance to Waymo's own exceptionally classified and exclusive design and reflects Waymo exchange secrets," Waymo's grumbling reads.
Waymo has accused two other previous Google employees of professedly downloading exclusive files. It also claims that Levandowski and Lior Ron, another Otto prime supporter who previously worked for Google, supposedly poached Google employees using private data, such as details of salaries and compensation packages.
The case is against Uber, be that as it may, not Levandowski and his cohorts. Testimony submitted by Waymo alleges that Levandowski met with Uber before Otto was established, however Levandowski said those meetings were to search for investors for his new organization.
Self-driving cars are an interesting issue in the auto and tech industries. Automakers from Toyota to Ford to Volvo all have projects under way. What's more Google and Uber, other Silicon Valley giants, similar to Apple, Intel and Tesla Motors, are wagering on the tech. On the off chance that the judge presiding over the case sides with Waymo, Uber might be compelled to stop its venture, which as of now involves autonomous vehicles in Pennsylvania, Arizona and California.
Michael Brophy, licensed innovation lawyer with Withers Bergman, said cases like this frequently wind up with one of three outcomes: snappy settlement; dismissal of the suit for absence of confirmation, absence of legitimately protectable property or another defense; or open trial.
"These matters are frequently made more confused by different factors, such as cross-claims or outsider case, sudden testimony or confirmation, showcase events, or insolvency," Brophy said. "Until Uber starts mounting its defense, it will be hard to anticipate which of these outcomes seems most likely or how Uber's asserted proof and potential truthful claims may weaken Alphabet/Waymo's efforts to achieve its goals."
As prominent as the fight in court is, Uber hopes parts of it will occur outside of general visibility. The organization documented a movement last month requesting that the disputes around prized formulas be resolved in private intervention instead of open court. The hearing to choose this matter is scheduled for April 27.
