7 ms·

Is it really true that an employee speculating about the monopolistic nature of their employer might get themselves into legal hot water? If Google got taken d

Is it really true that an employee speculating about the monopolistic nature of their employer might get themselves into legal hot water? If Google got taken down by one of their developers saying 'our employer kind of seems anticompetitive to me...' in an email, would that developer really have anything to fear from the government? It seems like the corporation is protecting itself with this sort of advice.

MattGaiser 6y ago
Depends on how you define legal trouble. Getting hauled in to testify before a judge or Congress would certainly qualify as legal trouble for me. Perhaps not direct legal trouble, but trouble nonetheless.
shadowgovt 6y ago
Correct. Primarily to protect the corporation. Indirectly, to protect the individual employee, because if a lawsuit going south harms the business prospects, the company might have to downsize, cut benefits, cut bonuses, &c.
jakevoytko 6y ago
The point they made around this was roughly, "Let's say that the US Government is making a case. If they can argue that you used your personal email, personal phone number, or ANYTHING for work at any point, they're going to subpoena as much of your private communications as possible and find a way to use the most embarrassing stuff to encourage you to cooperate." I left this part out of my other post because I was a little fuzzier on the details of what they said, but this was the gist. Edit: clarity
- brandmeyer 6y ago
  In typical Google fashion, there is a semi-automated system for taking snapshots of employees' email history and workstation disk images when discovery demands it. The snapshot feature is even sold as part of ~~G Suite~~ Google Workspace under the Vault product. As `shadowgovt` pointed out: Its a judge and the lawyers who get to decide what does and doesn't get covered by the process.
nerdponx 6y ago
I wonder if the company can sue the employee for libel in this case. Is it a warning or a threat?

MattGaiser 6y ago

Depends on how you define legal trouble. Getting hauled in to testify before a judge or Congress would certainly qualify as legal trouble for me. Perhaps not direct legal trouble, but trouble nonetheless.

shadowgovt 6y ago

Correct. Primarily to protect the corporation. Indirectly, to protect the individual employee, because if a lawsuit going south harms the business prospects, the company might have to downsize, cut benefits, cut bonuses, &c.

jakevoytko 6y ago

The point they made around this was roughly, "Let's say that the US Government is making a case. If they can argue that you used your personal email, personal phone number, or ANYTHING for work at any point, they're going to subpoena as much of your private communications as possible and find a way to use the most embarrassing stuff to encourage you to cooperate." I left this part out of my other post because I was a little fuzzier on the details of what they said, but this was the gist. Edit: clarity

brandmeyer 6y ago
In typical Google fashion, there is a semi-automated system for taking snapshots of employees' email history and workstation disk images when discovery demands it. The snapshot feature is even sold as part of ~~G Suite~~ Google Workspace under the Vault product. As `shadowgovt` pointed out: Its a judge and the lawyers who get to decide what does and doesn't get covered by the process.

nerdponx 6y ago

I wonder if the company can sue the employee for libel in this case. Is it a warning or a threat?