More details emerge of Uber’s tactics for thwarting police raids – TechCrunch: "So what might be the legal implications for companies that put programs in place intended to deliberately destroy or otherwise render information inaccessible at the point it’s being sought by investigators or regulators?
“If they have knowledge of a specific investigation and a specific… search warrant… and they encrypt while that raid’s going on to stop the agents from accessing the computers that they have a court order to access that could be considered obstruction of justice,” says Josh Robbins, partner at litigation law firm Greenberg Gross LLP, discussing the risks of companies trying to thwart regulatory oversight.
“If they were encrypting computers without knowledge of a specific investigation but encrypting computers as a security measure, just generally, I think it would be hard to make the allegation of obstruction of justice because they’d need to have knowledge of a specific investigation. It’s just a general security measure.
“But it shouldn’t matter because if they receive a subpoena, say, or a court order to produce records then they have the obligation to use their decryption key and unlock the computers and access the information and provide it to the government — and if they refuse to do that then they would be subject to sanctions, contempt of court and so on.”
In a civil case, a court could penalize a company for engaging in what’s known as “spoliation of evidence”, he notes" 'via Blog this'
No comments:
Post a Comment