News - AMD execs left to join NVIDIA, took 100,000 confidential docs

Quote:

---

“An extraordinary case of trade secret transfer and strategic employee solicitation”.

---

Read more.

Query to those with more legal savvy than me.

Okay so they are going after the employees BUT unless they can prove NVIDIA had any knowledge/active role in this, do they have any claim against NVIDIA?

According to the article, they're after the ex-employees ATM but whether that changes will likely depend on future evidence. If Nvidia knowingly accepted/used/abused the documents, then they will likely find themselves a target too.

In the past, a few companies have done the right thing and reported to the police/other company about rogue employees etc, I can't remember off the top of my head who but it was fairly recent.

Hi Watercooled

I get that from the article. My qestion is that if NVIDIA benefitted from the theft of these documents but did not know about it (or at least cannot be proven to have kniown about it) - can they be held liable in any way?

I'm not sure TBH, I guess it would depend what exactly was in the documents and if it could be easily recognised as AMD property or whatever. Stuff like detailed, far-looking timelines for instance, could be disastrous if people high up in Nvidia got a look at them, and they can't be forced to forget, so Nvidia could profit by knowing when to release products and at what performance target to compete with AMD. AMD would likely have to re-do their timelines etc, and/or bring forward products to avoid Nvidia stealing market share with unfair competition - this would cost AMD real money, and Nvidia would have had a better chance to defend themselves if they reported the illegal espionage as soon as they became aware of it.

TL-DR: No idea, law isn't a strong point of mine. :P

recieving stolen goods is a crime .. wether you know or not ..and the amd letterhead would be a good give away .. :)

re: Receiving stolen goods

I'm not sure it always is (in the UK we have some scope around acting in good faith) - yes if they should have suspected it was coming from AMD (the letterheads etc) but not obvious if the information was presented in a different way and drip-fed deliberately by the execs involved. NVIDIA could then have been benefitting but innocent/oblivious to the fact (if acting in good faith and not knowing of any wrongdoing).

It'd be a bit like a comedy sketch I remember where God casts Adam and Eve out of the garden of Eden because they both ate the apple, but was Adam really be to blame if he had only eaten it (unknowingly) as part of a fruit salad given to him by Eve?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flearider

recieving stolen goods is a crime .. wether you know or not ..and the amd letterhead would be a good give away .. :)

---

Is it?

Sales people lifting their contacts list is almost part of the course.

Surprised this doesn't happen more often give how little attention is given to internal security these days. Staff have got used to copying everthing to their laptop / phone - somethign like this was only a matter of time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wasabi

Sales people lifting their contacts list is almost part of the course.

Surprised this doesn't happen more often give how little attention is given to internal security these days. Staff have got used to copying everthing to their laptop / phone - somethign like this was only a matter of time.

---

any company worth its salt will have as a clause the conatcts list mentioned - so taking it and you`ll be persued - which has been the case in many many times.


with amd vs nv , it would be a case of nv having to prove they didn't have access to the information , as amd have proven that it was already taken....

Now this is interesting!

Would I be correct in saying that:

- AMD have to prove that the employees stole the information, and claim their damages from them. Nvidia need not be involved, because if AMD claimed that Nvidia stole the files then AMD would have to prove that this was the more likely scenario.

However...

- If the employees want to raise an affirmative defense and blame a 3rd party, aka Nvidia, then the employees would have to prove a preponderance of the evidence.

- Hence at no point will Nvidia be required to prove that they did not have access to the files.

It seems AMD have said they had the computers forensically examined.

why didn't they have a contract that said that they can't join a rival company in the same field?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jay

why didn't they have a contract that said that they can't join a rival company in the same field?

---

Would you sign a contract like that?

SA has some more details:

http://semiaccurate.com/2013/01/17/a.../#.UPhgX2dgFe9

Also,it seems Manoo Desai worked at Nvidia,then moved to AMD and is now back at Nvidia again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tpyo

Query to those with more legal savvy than me.

Okay so they are going after the employees BUT unless they can prove NVIDIA had any knowledge/active role in this, do they have any claim against NVIDIA?

---

As a company Nvidia is a distinct legal person who is (within limits) responsible for the actions of its staff and can be sued on that basis. IF and that a big if they can prove that there was a transfer of documents or information from these former AMD personal to Nvidia personnel who had knowledge (which given the nature of the industry they almost certainly will have done) of the confidentiality agreements that these personnel were bound by then they will almost certain be liable for some damages if said staff didn't report that back to amd immediately. Nvidia might as a company then be able to sue the staff responsible for exposing the company to those damages but it depends on the circumstances and how high this went. Without access to the briefs and a hold lot of time its difficult to tell how much for but this will probably never go to court i bet in 6 months we will be reading about nvidia settling this for something between $20-100 million.