Slashdot Mirror
Bank Goofs, and Judge Orders Gmail Account Nuked
An anonymous reader writes "The Rocky Mountain Bank, based in Wyoming, accidentally sent confidential financial information to the wrong Gmail account. When Google refused to identify the innocent account owner's information, citing its privacy policy, the bank filed in Federal court to have the account deactivated and the user's information revealed. District Judge James Ware granted the bank's request, with the result that the user has had his email access cut off without any wrongdoing or knowledge of why." The Reg's earlier story says, "Rocky Mountain Bank had asked to court to keep its suit under seal, hoping to avoid panic among its customers and a 'surge of inquiry.' But obviously, this wasn't successful."
Please explain why you think the gmail user should get to keep the private bank account data. Please explain why it's more responsible for the bank to simply allow an anonymous person to have 1325 bank records than to file a court action to get the data erased.
And what's wrong with sealing records in a privacy-related court case?
If I were on that list of 1325 names, I'd want the data erased. If the bank needed to go to court to accomplish this, I'd expect them to file suit. I'd want the court records sealed so I'm not publicly dragged into this. And I'd also switch banks.