Uber to engineer: Return stolen docs, or swear you didn't steal them

Re:Uber to engineer: Return stolen docs, or swear you didn't... by TeMPOraL on Friday May 19, 2017 @06:07PM (#14379695)

Replace "Big Corp" with "organized crime" and "steal" with... well, "steal" may stay - and yes, I think courts already encourage that, and with good reason - ultimately, it's vital to be able to catch the people actually scheming, and not just the pawns executing those schemes.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Uber to engineer: Return stolen docs, or swear you didn't... by jlarocco on Friday May 19, 2017 @07:29PM (#14380099)

I think it's pretty rare for courts to offer full immunity to people involved in organized crime, and they definitely don't offer it to the highest level targets.

Levandowski may not be the mastermind behind the whole thing, but his going along with it is the only reason it was even possible. And he made a ton of money from it. There's no way he's going to get immunity.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Uber to engineer: Return stolen docs, or swear you didn't... by TeMPOraL on Friday May 19, 2017 @07:35PM (#14380123)

I didn't mean immunity, just leniency.

In this case, I'm convinced that Levandowski will not get away scot-free.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Uber to engineer: Return stolen docs, or swear you didn't... by travmatt on Friday May 19, 2017 @08:02PM (#14380227)

IIUC, much of American corporate law works like this - be the one to bring us this info, and we'll take it easy on you. They then go harder after the individuals/companies who held out - trying to maximize the prisoners dilemma.

[ Parent | on HN ]