 |
| The latest hack of Sony Pictures's confidential information may lead to future hassles. Image: Ken Wolter / Shutterstock.com |
Sony Pictures is only the latest in a long line of big
corporations that were hacked this year.
For Sony, which already suffered the breach of 77 million users of its
Playstation Network this year, the latest hack has brought to light not only
disturbing information about the company, but also potential legal hassles for
the future.
The hacker group GOP (“Guardians of Peace”) has taken
responsibility for the hack, releasing several waves of confidential emails
detailing negotiations, derogatory comments about actors and producers, and
salaries. They are also thought to have
stolen 47,000 Social Security numbers.
In fact, Sony likely knew about the potential for hacking
months before it occurred. In one batch
of emails released by GOP, Courtney Schaberg, VP of Legal Compliance, and Leah
Weil, general counsel, corresponded
about a breach in February, in which some of the company’s Brazilian files
were stolen. However, because Brazil
doesn’t have a breach notification law, Sony did not notify anyone or go public
with the attack.
The ensuing legal problems are just beginning. For example, one leaked document, entitled
“Comp Roster by Supervisory Organization 2014-10-21” includes detailed data
about salaries and bonuses earned by thousands of Sony Pictures employees. This document could easily be used to point
out that the highest salaries are going to white men—potentially evidence in a
racial or gender discrimination lawsuit.
Jeremy Goldman, talent attorney at Frankfurt Kurnit, pointed
out that such a document could also be used to determine whether or not Sony
has been paying its talent appropriately.
Generally, talent are paid based on a percentage; however, if they knew
specific overhead costs, their lawyers could negotiate better pay rather than
relying on Sony to report percentages accurately. "Getting those ultimate numbers will potentially drive a
change in leverage in favor of profit participants," said
Goldman.
If
such a dispute came to court, would a document attained via a hack like this be
legitimate evidence? Attorneys are
divided. Some believe a judge would
allow it so long as the litigants weren’t responsible for the leak. Others argue that allowing it would encourage
future hackers, something judges would certainly want to avoid.
Whatever
future litigation this sort of information brings, if any, it’s likely to cause
a reevaluation of what evidence is and isn’t acceptable in a hacking case.
Post a Comment