4 ms·
Yeah, I'm not an expert, but my understanding is that's clearly not privileged. It's not surprising the government is trying to get access to them, but I also d
by aikinai 5y ago
Yeah, I'm not an expert, but my understanding is that's clearly not privileged. It's not surprising the government is trying to get access to them, but I also don't think it's evidence of Google trying to hide anything. There is training, but a lot of people ignore it and treat Legal haphazardly.
- otterley 5y agoThe article claims that even the CEO of Google did this when sending an email to the CEO of YouTube. These are people who should know better, and if true, then it’s not exactly the innocuous case of the inexperienced individual accidentally marking a communication as attorney-client privileged.
- kevincox 5y agoI don't think "attorneys didn't respond" is enough evidence to declare "that's clearly not privileged". An attorney missing an email is irrelevant to whether or not an email is privileged. The more important factors are probably 1. Was the message actually to the attorney, or were they just included for the appearance of privileged and 2. Was a response actually expected from the attorney?