Live data from Hacker News

Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

ia601707.us.archive.org

11–20 of 402 posts

Re: Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

#11
post #8

Pardon my ignorance, but why isn't Pichai allowed to have chat conversations that don't record history? Was there a case against Google already that bans this or something? And couldn't this just be circumvented by having an in-person meeting?

The complaint details the reason it was not allowed in this case, though would be normally: the topics were subject to legal holds.

> Like Mr. Pichai, other key Google employees, including those in leadership roles, routinely opted to move from history-on rooms to history-off Chats to hold sensitive conversations, even though they knew they were subject to legal holds. Indeed, they did so even when discussing topics they knew were covered by the litigation holds in order to avoid leaving a record that could be produced in litigation. As the examples below make clear, Google destroyed innumerable Chats with the intent to deprive Plaintiffs and other litigants of the use of these documents in litigation

Note: that's the argument the plaintiff's lawyers are making, not the final word on the matter

Re: Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

#12
post #8

Pardon my ignorance, but why isn't Pichai allowed to have chat conversations that don't record history? Was there a case against Google already that bans this or something? And couldn't this just be circumvented by having an in-person meeting?

Google was under a litigation hold order to preserve all written or otherwise recorded communications related to the litigation.

Re: Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

#13
post #8

Pardon my ignorance, but why isn't Pichai allowed to have chat conversations that don't record history? Was there a case against Google already that bans this or something? And couldn't this just be circumvented by having an in-person meeting?

> why isn't [...] Was there a case against Google already that bans this or something?

According to [1], "The DOJ maintains Google should have suspended its auto-delete practices by 2019, when it was clear litigation was coming."

I found more details in [2] on the legal topic of evidence spoliation that might be interesting, though I'm not a lawyer and don't know what which law(s) are relevant in this case.

> And couldn't this just be circumvented by having an in-person meeting?

Yes, but there's presumably a difference between deleting evidence vs. not having it in the first place.

[1] https://gizmodo.com/google-employee-chats-deleted-evidence-j...

[2] https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba-cms-dotorg/produ...

Re: Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

#15
post #11
post #8

Pardon my ignorance, but why isn't Pichai allowed to have chat conversations that don't record history? Was there a case against Google already that bans this or something? And couldn't this just be circumvented by having an in-person meeting?

The complaint details the reason it was not allowed in this case, though would be normally: the topics were subject to legal holds. > Like Mr. Pichai, other key Google employees, including those in leadership roles, routinely opted to move from history-on rooms to history-off Chats to hold sensitive conversations, even though they knew they were subject to legal holds. Indeed, they did so even when discussing topics…

Interesting, is there any documentation about the legal holds details?

Re: Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

#16
post #11
post #8

Pardon my ignorance, but why isn't Pichai allowed to have chat conversations that don't record history? Was there a case against Google already that bans this or something? And couldn't this just be circumvented by having an in-person meeting?

The complaint details the reason it was not allowed in this case, though would be normally: the topics were subject to legal holds. > Like Mr. Pichai, other key Google employees, including those in leadership roles, routinely opted to move from history-on rooms to history-off Chats to hold sensitive conversations, even though they knew they were subject to legal holds. Indeed, they did so even when discussing topics…

Thanks, I'm not familiar with what a legal hold is. Would they be obliged to take audio recordings or minutes of meetings due to this?

Re: Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

#17
post #8

Pardon my ignorance, but why isn't Pichai allowed to have chat conversations that don't record history? Was there a case against Google already that bans this or something? And couldn't this just be circumvented by having an in-person meeting?

> Was there a case against Google already that bans this or something?

There’s a general obligation to preserve records pertaining to the subject of actual ot reasonably anticipated litigation, and chats are records.

Re: Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

#18
post #8

Pardon my ignorance, but why isn't Pichai allowed to have chat conversations that don't record history? Was there a case against Google already that bans this or something? And couldn't this just be circumvented by having an in-person meeting?

> why isn't [...] Was there a case against Google already that bans this or something? According to [1], "The DOJ maintains Google should have suspended its auto-delete practices by 2019, when it was clear litigation was coming." I found more details in [2] on the legal topic of evidence spoliation that might be interesting, though I'm not a lawyer and don't know what which law(s) are relevant in this case. > And cou…

Thanks. The law is kind of silly. A chat system that doesn't store history is functionally equivalent to an unrecorded call, but I'm guessing they would not consider an unrecorded call destruction of evidence.

Re: Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

#19
post #3

Then, nine seconds later, Mr. Pichai apparently attempted (unsuccessfully) to delete this incriminating message. lol

It really seems to me that to succeed in business in the US one has to skirt the line of legality with regularity.

Re: Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

#20
None of this is particularly surprising, but it's very amusing to see the litigation go this route. It's incredible common for corporate legal to recommend purging data or communications no longer relevant, or to advise avoiding specific means of communication (like email) due to retention challenges.

It's incredibly dumb to explicitly discuss avoiding leading a paper trail with respect to subjects where litigation is imminent or already in progress.

The point of these legal policies is generally to avoid unnecessary risk. From a legal perspective it's impossible to control communication completely but advice to reduce the scope or volume of legal holds is almost always reasonable. Legal holds can be really painful, and it's not uncommon for a lot of unrelated communications to become in-scope.

This is exciting to see, I hope it triggers real change in corporate culture but I suspect it might simply make it even worse.

Post reply on HN