[earthtourist]

The question in criminal cases should be: how many people's lives were hurt by the crime, and how severely?

In this case, no one's life was the slightest bit injured. Uber is most likely too incompetent to be a real threat. Waymo has undoubtedly advanced far from the versions of everything that he copied illegally. It won't damage them at all. If anything, the lawsuit and criminal case were probably more damaging to their progress due to the distraction.

This is pretty similar to copying software or movies illegally. In almost all cases, there is no injured party. It's simply illegal by virtue of the powerful corporations demanding laws that they can use as a bludgeon.

Startups and other small companies don't get any of this "protection", but when someone copies code illegally from Google or Goldman Sachs, the FBI gets involved and makes them pay dearly. Prosecutors use the cases to make their bones.

I'm not suggesting that what this guy did was ethically or legally correct, just that it didn't actually harm any human life. It should probably be illegal but the punishment/fines should be capped at a very low level. The laws should primarily be designed to stop someone from continuing to use illegally copied data.

[saghm]

> Uber is most likely too incompetent to be a real threat

I don't necessarily disagree with all of your comment, but I feel like incompetence should not be a factor in determining punishment severity. Being unprofitable should not be a valid defense for illegal behavior.

[earthtourist]

Sure, agreed. The point there is just that copying IP isn't that meaningful if it can't be effectively utilized. Many parties have presumably copied Boeing and Airbus IP related to their jets, and yet none have effectively utilized it.

Stealing the golden eggs is not the same as stealing the golden goose.

[heavenlyblue]

It’s like justifying sexual harassment by being bad at sex