Mitsubishi = Client || Snap-on = Original Contractor || O'Neil = New Contractor || A database was made by Snap-on for Mitsubishi. Mitsubishi moved the work to

Mitsubishi = Client || Snap-on = Original Contractor || O'Neil = New Contractor || A database was made by Snap-on for Mitsubishi. Mitsubishi moved the work to O'Neil. Snap-on did not want to give up their work [data]. A log in was required to access the data. Mitsubishi and O'Neil discussed ways to get the data. O'Neil tried to covertly get the data and hide what they were doing, according to 'testimony'. O'Neil caused damage. Snap-on sued O'Neil. I think this is a better summary than the linked site. Plus I did not have 500 paragraphs with 2 sentences per section. No information was given on the contract terms. It is not mentioned how accounts are created to access the data. It is also not mentioned who should or should not have access. The method of gathering the data was not discussed at all; no mentioned of an automated process, no mention of a script, no mention of using interns with a Firefox plugin.