- cross-posted to:
- usa
- cross-posted to:
- usa
You must log in or # to comment.
Important context:
- Data was recovered
- Plaintiff does not believe it was purposeful
- Cost plaintiff a week’s work
- Plaintiff has already spent 150 hours going through data
it is the 2024 version of the dog ate my homework
A megafuckhuge IT corp who deals in data doesn’t have backups, right, RIGHT???
The fact that clicking the link takes you to a 404 page definitely helps with the whole “accidentally” bit.
Anyone know if the story turned out to be false and got deleted or if it’s just a dud link?
deleted by creator
They know they’ll get away with it, so why wouldn’t they
Well it was accidental so that’s all right.
It really was convenient though.
No… No it didn’t… But you can imagine what it would be like if it did, right?
“Accidentally”
“I accidentally did something that I had to explicitly go out of my way to do, and doing literally nothing could have prevented it”
Lol how many of us thought this immediately?
Apparently, everyone 😂
About as accidental as falling off the stairs in Russia
That only happens when they accidentally miss the window.
That can happen if you’re distracted accidentally shooting yourself in the back of the head twice.
“Accidentally”
Then the assumption should be the most damning scenario for open AI that this evidence could provide.
AFAIK that is, in fact, how juries are generally instructed to regard destruction of evidence.
Even “accidental” destruction?
Incompetence has a price.
Are you actually educat3d on this or just saying things? Because I’m asking bc idk
So, I had to double check myself on this one, and my original answer wasn’t entirely correct.
If it is found that the destruction of evidence was intentional then yes, the jury can be instructed to view the missing information in the least favorable light, or a case can simply be outright dismissed or a default judgement entered.
However even in the case of “accidental” (ie, not provably intentional) deletion the court can still take various measures to redress the balance in some way.
I am not a lawyer but this guy is - https://joneskell.com/how-spoliation-of-evidence-impacts-litigation/
Word, thank you for the high effort and detailed explanation.
Keep in kind that there is a geopolitical orientation in law. What is written here may not apply in all regions, nor all types of legal procedure.
Failing to preserve evidence is sacntionable, even if it isn’t willful destruction. The penalties generally aren’t as stiff, but if the judges accepted “Oopsie, we accidentally destroyed evidence we were required to preserve” as a defense, there would be an incentive to destroy evidence and claim it was an accident.
The fact that most companies still turn over evidence that’s damning to their own cases is the proof that it’s generally a bad idea to accidentally destroy evidence.
Look at it another way: If you’re speeding and get pulled over, would a judge let you off if you tell him you were only doing 70 in a 35 because you weren’t paying attention to the road?
It depends on the court and the judge/jury instructions but even accidental spoliation (destruction) of evidence can result in an adverse inference.
“Accidentally”
accidentally
Let a judge be the judge of that…
I mean, even the plaintiff thinks it was an accident.
Perhaps obstructing justice isn’t as bad as copyright infringement?
“Accidentally”
“Oopsie woopsie 🤭” - OpenAI
