Margaret Mitchell fired from Google

Re:Margaret Mitchell fired from Google by pseudalopex on Saturday February 20, 2021 @11:09AM (#26205161)

Legal counsel is a common exception to NDAs. Different jurisdictions have different specific rules. And most people would have tried to hide it. But saying you can't do that isn't true categorically.

She could have taken files that weren't material. But that's just speculation.

Google claimed the documents went to multiple external accounts. So they must know which accounts. So Mitchell could say who owned them. And they could verify.

Any lawyer will tell you to preserve evidence yourself if you can.

How would people sympathetic to her cause preserve evidence without violating Google's policies?

What might be disclosed during the trial is the same as if Google provided the files.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Margaret Mitchell fired from Google by bleah1000 on Sunday February 21, 2021 @04:33AM (#26212131)

I'm not sure I understand your claim. Assuming she could get an exemption from an NDA, I don't think that means she can just grab all of the data she wants. Do you have some cases in mind where a whistle blower, or a worker was able to grab large volumes of data and send them to their counsel without repercussion? I think if she had taken a small number of targeted e-mails and documents and sent them to legal counsel, that might stand up. But it appears that she took thousands of e-mails and some number of documents (or maybe the e-mails contained attached documents). We'll have to wait for whatever lawsuit comes to find out if Google is exaggerating the total number of documents, and she only took a small handful. However, I would find it odd if an automated system would trip if she grabbed only a few tens of e-mails/documents. But maybe after the Uber incident, Google is a little more paranoid about when documents are taken off Google computers.

[ Parent | on HN ]