Lyft Accuses Former COO of Stealing Confidential Docs Before Joining Uber

http://techcrunch.com/2014/11/05/lyft-sues-travis-vanderzanden

by bruceb • 12 years ago

157 82 12 years ago

bruceb• 12 years ago

How many of these suits are successful? I know often an agreement is reached at it is not public. It would be great to know.

jonsterling2• 12 years ago

I hope they destroy each other!

kstrauser• 12 years ago

Me too. I despise how Lyft and Uber servers always take my request without offering stupid excuses why they can't come to where I'm at, unlike the cab companies. I hate that they never have a problem billing my credit card, unlike yellow taxis. And I especially dislike that I can usually get an estimate of my fare ahead of time, so that it's not in the driver's best interest to take me from SOMA to North Beach via Daly City - unlike the cabbies.

I'm sorry, but I just can't have this conversation non-sarcastically. Both companies offer _so_ much better service than their predecessors that I can't understand the desire to go back to the bad old days.

DINKDINK• 12 years ago

I can't understand the desire to go back to the bad old days.

There's nothing in the comment you're responding to that advocates for regressing back to a Regulated Taxi paradigm.

stormbrew• 12 years ago

As someone who lives in a city that doesn't yet have either, it really frustrates me that they (but mostly Uber) keep pulling this shit, precisely because I'm stuck in the bad old days and I have tasted the new, but they're poisoning this well really severely right now.

Uber in particular is the most likely to make an entrance here (they're hosting driver registration right now, but the bylaw situation is murky at best) and I'm really worried that if they get shut out for some of the bullshit they pull it'll kill the regulatory framework for other entrants for a long time.

minimaxir2• 12 years ago

Note that the defendant is VanderZanden, not Uber.

anigbrowl6• 12 years ago

For the time being. After they're done with discovery on his Gmail and Dropbox personal accounts there would be an amended complaint.

minimaxir2• 12 years ago

Items 87-93 of the lawsuit are very interesting. They imply that VanderZanden convinced other Lyft employees to abandon ship to start a startup...but then they join Uber instead?

Item 27 is probably the first legal usage of "acqui-hire" ever.

cheepin• 12 years ago

Isn't this exactly what non-compete clauses were meant for?

delecti• 12 years ago

Yeah, it's one thing for Jimmy John's to protect their company from sandwich assemblers stealing sandwich secrets, its another for a corporate officer to move to their main direct competitor.

At least have the common decency to spend a period as a government industry regulator in between.

colinbartlett3• 12 years ago

No, this is what confidentiality agreements are for. Which the defendant allegedly signed.

Non-compete clauses prevent you from competing and are largely unenforceable, particularly in California.

quaunaut• 12 years ago

Non-compete clauses prevent you from competing and are largely unenforceable

Is this true? I'm not doubting, I'm just wondering why. I know a lot of people in the games industry who aren't allowed to work on mods for another company's game and are terrified to even do a little bit, so I always thought they were enforceable.

droopyEyelids• 12 years ago

This is one of the few times they would be enforcable though. They work when you can bring the client list or future of the company with you to your new job.

x0x02• 12 years ago

They're trying to slide a non-solicit into a confidentiality agreement. Hopefully the court will not accept this.

alain940402• 12 years ago

Read the complaint, it's pretty bad. Dude googles how to copy his work email from gmail, and also copies hot corporate documents to his private dropbox the day he quits for Uber. All the while emailing the Lyft founders saying "I still love you like brothers".

I try to avoid people and companies with poor ethics.

colinbartlett3• 12 years ago

Link to complaint: http://www.scribd.com/doc/245665642/Lyft-Sues-Former-COO

It's pretty damning if it is proven. Be on the lookout for a confidential settlement.

bradleyjg• 12 years ago

Why would Lyft agree to a confidential settlement? The bad publicity for Uber is more valuable than whatever money they can get from their former employee.

PhasmaFelis• 12 years ago

I try to avoid both unethical people and people who are dumb as rocks. I think this guy qualifies as both, if he actually did corporate espionage unencrypted over the corporation's own network.

encoderer4• 12 years ago

The complaint alleges that a few days before resigning he made a to-do list (using his working computer naturally) that included "Backup Lyft Email and Contacts".

What a fool. Hubris.

tedks3• 12 years ago

I think at this point, it's clear to me that Lyft is the one with poor ethics.

I would literally never have heard of Lyft without all of their accusations against Über. Über is trying to poach drivers; Über is getting our C-level guys to baldly incriminate themselves and then jump ship to Über; Über is stealing our cookies; waaaah waaah waaah Uber.

Honestly, I find it impossible to believe the Über team is both this B-movie-level evil, and stupid. It's really, really hard to believe that a COO of a successful startup wouldn't know how to copy documents that are on his OWN MACHINE (the private dropbox documents).

So, since Lyft obviously gets assloads of free publicity from all these accusations, and since I've never seen an actual court judgment against Über reported, I somewhat doubt that these are actually true, or at least not actually provable, since like others have said, if Lyft could successfully sue Über over any one of these things, the media would have even more of a field day than it's having now.

So okay. Über stole your drivers, your COO, shot your dog, made a mean face at you, whatever. Prove it in court. Until then I'm done with this bullshit. And I'll be happily using Über.

(The only thing that Über has really done that's unethical is be as brutally capitalist as they can, but I find that a difficult accusation to level against them since it's not like any other company is doing exactly the same thing. That's a systemic issue, not a local one.)

Edit: You know, if Lyft was running a black-hat PR campaign against Über, it'd be just like them to shill on HN. Thanks for the downvotes, Lyft.

chimeracoder• 12 years ago

Honestly, I find it impossible to believe the Uber team is both this B-movie-level evil, and stupid. It's really, really hard to believe that a COO of a successful startup wouldn't know how to copy documents that are on his OWN MACHINE (the private dropbox documents).
So, since Lyft obviously gets assloads of free publicity from all these accusations, and since I've never seen an actual court judgment against Uber reported, I somewhat doubt that these are actually true, or at least not actually provable, since like others have said, if Lyft could successfully sue Uber over any one of these things, the media would have even more of a field day than it's having now.

So just to clarify, you think Lyft is making these accusations up for the sake of getting publicity?

And fabricating evidence to file in a lawsuit?

jsmthrowaway• 12 years ago

Uber completely ignored Philadelphia's telling them that launching uberX there is illegal, then let their own drivers get their personal vehicles impounded in a game of chicken.

Yet Lyft has the poor ethics. Right.

Considering there is serious civil harm arising from making up a lawsuit, do you have any evidence that Lyft's allegations are false or do you just flap your gums because you like Uber more? It never ceases to amaze me how people in all considerations can pick a side and stick to it, ignoring all data that doesn't fit their narrative. You like Uber more, nobody is begrudging you that. Turning your preference into calling Lyft unethical and the rest of your comment is, quite honestly, stupid.

Schweigi• 12 years ago

I'm interest to know if Uber knew about this. I wouldn't hire people who take documents with them they stole in their previous company - who knows what they do once they leave.

shoyer• 12 years ago

Indeed, the evidence is pretty damning.

My guess is that this ends with him fired from Ubert. Now that Lyft has presented the evidence, that may be the only way for Uber to avoid liability itself.

refurb2• 12 years ago

Every company that supports employees using their personal devices (phones, tablets, etc) as work devices should read the complaint carefully.

If it's the companies phone, they can request it be returned. VanderZanden was using his personal phone while at Lyft. When he left, he just sold it. The problem is that it puts Lyft in an awkward position: they are requesting he turn over his personal device so that they can analyze it to confirm no confidential information remains.

"VanderZanden provided no explanation as to why he sold his phone.... it's an odd thing for a high-net worth individual to do..."

I'd probably tell them to stuff it too, it's my phone.

Also, I find it interesting that the complaint is also against one to ten "unnamed defendants". I didn't know you could do that.

jcdavis• 12 years ago

This is why Exchange support on iOS (not sure about Android) allows remote wipes, and you better remove the account before you quit

gamblor956• 12 years ago

Android too, but android has mtm software like nine or touchdown that act as virtual devices for exchange access. If the exchange account is terminated, only the virtual device gets wiped.

ceejayoz2• 12 years ago

Also, I find it interesting that the complaint is also against one to ten "unnamed defendants". I didn't know you could do that.

MPAA/RIAA did this a lot when suing downloaders. They'd sue based on IP addresses, so the complaint would be against 50 John Does.

jevinskie• 12 years ago

Sony vs Geohot et al had John Doe 1-100.

http://ia700401.us.archive.org/35/items/gov.uscourts.cand.23...

click170• 12 years ago

This is one of the reasons that decent sized startups should be giving important people a dedicated company-owned device if those people need access to sensitive company info from their phones.

In the recent past I've had to fight for this with a previous employer who thought it was acceptable to impose security restrictions on personal devices that are used to access company info. Many people just stopped accessing company info from their phones - they would prefer to be able to root / jailbreak their phones if they choose to.

Simple thought experiment: your competitor is caught red-handed doing the thing you are pondering, how do you think it will reflect on them?

anigbrowl6• 12 years ago

Unnamed defendants are common in litigation in the early stages. It's easier to amend the details of the complaint than to join additional parties to it after the case has started moving so if you have an expectation of edintifying more defendants you might as well mention that from the outset - otherwise you're liable to get derailed in obtuse procedural litigation.

mkal_tsr• 12 years ago

Just a continuation of the uber-lyft saga of ethics and fair business practices ... ahahaah, sorry, I can't type that with a straight face. Seeing these crowd-sharing services eat each-other is both hilarious and sad. The underhanded tactics, the smearing, etc., just sad this is the state of affairs for companies that receive millions and millions in funding. I guess it'll be good for their legal department's bank statements, so that's somethin.

refurb2• 12 years ago

If you read the details of the complaint, it gets interesting.

They claim he failed to return his computer, but if you read points 42 and 43, they first asked him on Aug 18th (6 calls and emails went unanswered) then actually retrieved it the next day. Really? If the guy is busy he may not have made it a priority.

patio11• 12 years ago

Complaint paragraph 47 alleges that use of Evernote constitutes a breach of confidentiality and fiduciary duty, which is one of those things that strikes me as "legally pretty defensible" and "totally disastrous when juxtaposed with how knowledge workers actually work."

Edit: Actually, on re-reading, they appear to mean not "Evernote constitutes a breach" but "We accessed his Evernote and his state of mind, as recorded in it, constitutes a breach." (Eek.)

alain940402• 12 years ago

I think you misread the complaint. Evernote is only mentioned as evidence of planning. The dude wrote down his todo list of copying on Evernote...

viscanti2• 12 years ago

Sounds like a great company to work for. Everyone hopes that their employer logs in and reads their personal account on evernote and dropbox.

x0x02• 12 years ago

I wonder how they accessed his evernote, if it was legal to do so, and if not, whether anyone will be prosecuted (the last question is certainly no.)

toomuchtodo3• 12 years ago

Evernote client syncs locally. They performed forensics on the filesytem, and the note was more than likely cached locally on disk.

Weapons-grade stupid on VanderZanden's part.

3327• 12 years ago

wow this is ugly heavy duty stuff. I bet that data is more valuable then the settlement. Data like that on your competitor is priceless specially at this level of competition.

roymurdock• 12 years ago

After seeing a lot of negative press on Uber and its questionable tactics, I'm wondering the following:

Is it necessary for Uber to be so cutthroat, sneaky, and brutal to survive in the space they've carved out for themselves, or is this just a reflection of the poor character of the management team?

forrestthewoods• 12 years ago

Well I think for starters they haven't carved out a space for themselves. They were the first to a new space made possibly by recent advances in technology, but that's it. Furthermore as technology continues to march forward it's only going to become easier and easier for competitors to enter the same space.

So from that perspective yeah, yeah I guess they do have to be cut throat to survive. The service they provide is not far off from being commoditized. It's easy and cheap for competitors to step in and drive prices down. Will be very, very hard for Uber to secure their space. Honestly the only thing that will make it possible is the same time of legal protection that taxi companies have had.

Oops.

hkmurakami• 12 years ago

They can also protect it through scale, since more drivers and users on the platform means better liquidity in the rider driver market, and a more pleasant seamless experience compared to a newcomer.

Hence the cutthroatness.

mbca• 12 years ago

[I]t's only going to become easier and easier for competitors to enter the same space.

Not going to happen. Those "regulators" they decry so loudly? I'm sure they have plans to buy a few once they get big enough and use them to put barriers in place to put a stop to any competitors. Combine that with their size (and thus their ability to undercut any new competition), and I don't see anything but an Uber monopoly on the way.

prostoalex4• 12 years ago

Another article from today might answer that question: http://www.vanityfair.com/business/2014/12/uber-travis-kalan...

In a nutshell, constant confrontation with politicians, taxi medallion owners, its own drivers, and competitors make this a fairly cut-throat industry. Uber took up this battle. Would a nicer, gentler company succeed in this space? Hard to say, so far the data says no.

nostrademons• 12 years ago

Lyft is that nicer, gentler company. That's their differentiator: "We're like Uber, but friendlier." Whether that can succeed in the marketplace will depend upon consumers like cutthroat & efficient over friendly & quirky. So far most of my friends prefer Uber, but then again, we're evil techies who are taking over SF with our laptops.

wamatt2• 12 years ago

Is it just me, or does Uber's behavior seem a bit Microsoft-in-the-90's?

wamatt2• 12 years ago

Ok that was weird; tbh I'm genuinely confused. It would be helpful if anyone can explain what is so awful about my comment?

encoderer4• 12 years ago

I don't have any dog in this fight, but why are you holding this against Uber? The idea that they put him up to this borders on absurdity.

viscanti2• 12 years ago

I don't get any new information about Uber from this, but it's interesting to see Lyft pursue it. It's also interesting to see what appears to be several of the top people from Lyft choose to go over to Uber. This doesn't look good for Lyft.

anigbrowl6• 12 years ago

What's absurd about it? Being hired to oversee Uber's overseas markets, it's hard to see what personal incentive he would have had to take all that data with him.

wahsd• 12 years ago

Here's how things will go. Über will continue steamrolling the country and locking down the market and subduing drivers into subjugation, then they will start regulatory and policy capture by corrupting politicians to write rules that keep them in power with as little effort as possible.

The reason Über is trying to crush competition, is that it knows they are currently still vulnerable for real competition to enter. Once they have dominated all the major metropolitan centers, they will know that they dominate to a point that significantly disincentivizes entry by real competition.

johnloeber3• 12 years ago

I don't think this is true. I think that the ridesharing market will become split between many interchangeable ride-sharing services. Three main reasons: (1) the barriers to entry for this market are actually very low, (2) it's hard for even a dominant company to differentiate itself from the competition, and (3) it is easy for both drivers and consumers to use all ridesharing services, to optimize pricing and wait times.

I wrote a piece on this just a few days ago. You can read it here: http://johnloeber.com/w/uber.pdf

acjohnson55• 12 years ago

It also brings to mind the question of whether their image will hurt their potential for regulatory acceptance (and the industry as a whole).

toephu2• 12 years ago

how did they trace the searches back to his computer? Did they have some key logging software? or if he was using HTTP it was easy to trace back to his local IP? if he was searching w/ HTTPS is it true they probably couldn't trace the searches back to his computer? (assuming he cleared his history+cache)

ceejayoz2• 12 years ago

Might be something so mundane as forgetting to clear his history on the company laptop (or they restored it - they mention computer forensics a few times).

toomuchtodo3• 12 years ago

If your browser does't encrypt your cookies, they sitting on the disk unencrypted at rest, easily read right of the filesystem. You could then use those cookies to gain access to the respective sites/services/accounts they're tied to.

Bud• 12 years ago

Hmmm. Looks like someone is flagging this item to knock it off the front page. Any bets that it's Uber-affiliated folks?

Not really cool behavior.

elastine• 12 years ago

Uber is proving to be one very shitty organization.

Lyft Accuses Former COO of Stealing Confidential Docs Before Joining Uber

Related Stories