Slashdot Mirror
Tesla Is Seeking $167 Million From Former Employee Accused of Sabotage (cnbc.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from CNBC: Tesla is seeking more than $167 million in a lawsuit against former employee Martin Tripp, recent legal filings revealed. In the lawsuit, which was filed by the electric car maker in June, Tesla alleges that Tripp, a former process engineer, had illegally exported data and made false claims to reporters, among other things. Tripp had earlier claimed in a number of press interviews that Tesla engaged in poor manufacturing practices at its massive battery plant outside of Reno, Nevada, and that it may have used damaged battery modules in its Model 3 vehicles, posing a risk to drivers.
An interim case management report published on Nov. 27 reveals that Tripp's attorneys aim to depose Tesla CEO Elon Musk and more than 10 people involved with the company. Tesla has refused to make Musk available and sought to limit the number of people deposed by Tripp's defense team at the law firm Tiffany & Bosco. Tripp's lawyers wrote in that report: "Tesla has objected to Mr. Tripp's desire to take more than ten depositions... In this case, where Mr. Tripp is being sued for more than $167,000,000 and has asserted counterclaims against Tesla, more than ten depositions is certainly reasonable and appropriate." Tripp attorney Robert D. Mitchell said in an email to CNBC: "The purported damage amount claimed by Tesla relates to supposed dips in Tesla's stock price by virtue of the information Mr. Tripp provided to the press last summer." He characterized the damage claims as "absurd."
An interim case management report published on Nov. 27 reveals that Tripp's attorneys aim to depose Tesla CEO Elon Musk and more than 10 people involved with the company. Tesla has refused to make Musk available and sought to limit the number of people deposed by Tripp's defense team at the law firm Tiffany & Bosco. Tripp's lawyers wrote in that report: "Tesla has objected to Mr. Tripp's desire to take more than ten depositions... In this case, where Mr. Tripp is being sued for more than $167,000,000 and has asserted counterclaims against Tesla, more than ten depositions is certainly reasonable and appropriate." Tripp attorney Robert D. Mitchell said in an email to CNBC: "The purported damage amount claimed by Tesla relates to supposed dips in Tesla's stock price by virtue of the information Mr. Tripp provided to the press last summer." He characterized the damage claims as "absurd."
Oh, and the point of a large figure (which Tripp obviously can't pay) has nothing to do with Tripp himself. The fun part will be discovery. Because anyone who might have been involved in telling him what data to get or otherwise communicating with him during the theft (Linette Lopez, I'm looking at you) would be soliciting a crime. Like, for example:
Peavy v. WFAA-TV Inc.: The media outlet was approached by an informant claiming that he had information about a local news issue. The media outlet refused to use the information without further documentation, encouraged the informant to obtain that, and advised him on the process (which amounted to an illegal wiretapping). The media outlet was found to have advised and encouraged the illegal acquisition of materials, which it then took possession of and published. The court characterized this as “undisputed participation.” The informant and the media outlet were found to be liable for the illegal acquisition.
Business Insider was valued at nearly $400M in 2015. If Linette was found to have been involved in the acquisition in any way - or in general failed any of the Bartnicki v. Vopper criteria:
1) The media outlet played no role in the illegal interception
2) The media received the information lawfully
3) The issue was a matter of public concern
Then they're criminally liable for the theft. And BI can't classify it as the actions of a "rogue employee", because when challenged earlier on the theft, BI came to Lopez's defense.
Also to watch out for:
* People who took a short position in TSLA after learning of the story before it was published
* People who already held a short position in TSLA who were involved in the chain of command on any decisions to work with Tripp and to publish
As I mentioned... discovery on this case is going to be loads of fun :) Especially because Tripp has so far proven so wreckless with how he's handled himself in this case (including posting a bunch of self-incriminating tweets - about revenge against Elon, claiming he doesn't know how to program, trying to hide his adafruit, scribd and stackoverflow accounts and then making hilariously bad excuses as for why he did so, chatting with famous Tesla shorts, etc - and then deleting them, as if they'd just disappear from the face of the Earth).
Seen on a Japanese food processor: "Not to be used for the other use."
Oh, and fun fact about Business Insider:
Pull on the thread....
Seen on a Japanese food processor: "Not to be used for the other use."
Damn. This is what obsession looks like, folks.
Says someone who has a canned post accusing me of faking my tesla car ownership, and posts it obsessively. It takes a maniac to recognize a fellow maniac, I suppose.
But to give credit where it is due, this guy stopped posting it under his handle and switched to anonymous coward after I said a few nice words about him in some thread.
I agree with many of his modded up postings. It is unfortunate, he likes to post far too many snarky one liners.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact