4 ms·
> There didn't seem to be a call to arms then. The first time I heard about it was September 1, and it was this, you know, like, whoops, we've got a problem. T
by synctext 3y ago
> There didn't seem to be a call to arms then. The first time I heard about it was September 1, and it was this, you know, like, whoops, we've got a problem.
They seem to have significant problems. Its broader then "not discovering" 5 minus 1 million of documents. There seems to be multiple smoking guns in evidence: https://www.justice.gov/d9/2023-09/416652.pdf https://www.justice.gov/d9/2023-09/416652.pdf
Google internal Email instruct: never to talk about 'market share' or even 'markets'. This is clear and deliberate behaviour to evade government regulators. It is institutionalised through legal training class 101.
Disclaimer: not a lawyer, CS professor with some courtroom experience.
- kuchenbecker 3y agoNAL - I'm failing to see how telling your employees not to do things that violate or give the impression of anti-trust law is a smoking gun. That seems like a no-brainer thing a company should be doing.
- detaro 3y agothe problem is when it becomes more instruction on "if you do X, make sure you don't say suspicious words so nobody notices we are doing X"
- professoretc 3y ago"...so that when we get sued and in discovery they ask for all documents discussing markets, nothing will come up."
- side_up_down 3y agoYou can be sure Google's lawyers vetted the training to ensure it was lawful instruction.