No Result
View All Result
SUBSCRIBE | NO FEES, NO PAYWALLS
MANAGE MY SUBSCRIPTION
NEWSLETTER
Corporate Compliance Insights
  • Home
  • About
    • About CCI
    • Writing for CCI
    • NEW: CCI Press – Book Publishing
    • Advertise With Us
  • Explore Topics
    • See All Articles
    • Compliance
    • Ethics
    • Risk
    • FCPA
    • Governance
    • Fraud
    • Internal Audit
    • HR Compliance
    • Cybersecurity
    • Data Privacy
    • Financial Services
    • Well-Being at Work
    • Leadership and Career
    • Opinion
  • Vendor News
  • Career Connection
  • Events
    • Calendar
    • Submit an Event
  • Library
    • Whitepapers & Reports
    • eBooks
    • CCI Press & Compliance Bookshelf
  • Podcasts
  • Videos
  • Subscribe
  • Home
  • About
    • About CCI
    • Writing for CCI
    • NEW: CCI Press – Book Publishing
    • Advertise With Us
  • Explore Topics
    • See All Articles
    • Compliance
    • Ethics
    • Risk
    • FCPA
    • Governance
    • Fraud
    • Internal Audit
    • HR Compliance
    • Cybersecurity
    • Data Privacy
    • Financial Services
    • Well-Being at Work
    • Leadership and Career
    • Opinion
  • Vendor News
  • Career Connection
  • Events
    • Calendar
    • Submit an Event
  • Library
    • Whitepapers & Reports
    • eBooks
    • CCI Press & Compliance Bookshelf
  • Podcasts
  • Videos
  • Subscribe
No Result
View All Result
Corporate Compliance Insights
Home Compliance

This Message Will Self-Destruct in 5 Seconds

How Use of Ephemeral Messaging Can Constitute Evidence of Wrongdoing

by Scott Sakiyama
March 26, 2020
in Compliance, Featured
closeup of icon of Signal app on smartphone

The proliferation of ephemeral messaging poses unique challenges when it comes to e-discovery. Buckley LLP’s Scott Sakiyama outlines those challenges, highlights recent case law and provides guidance for companies to follow.

Howard Baker’s quote – “it is almost always the cover-up rather than the event that causes trouble” – has taken on significance in recent cases involving e-discovery and electronic messaging. Courts increasingly view the preservation of communications as a rote, ordinary-course business practice and during litigation or investigations, where relevant electronic communications have not been preserved, the focus of the inquiry can turn from the actual event in question to a perceived cover-up.

The intentional destruction of evidence clearly has serious, potentially criminal implications, but the courts’ presumption about simplicity of preservation may not be as obvious to companies charged with that responsibility, given the proliferation of ephemeral messaging applications. Ephemeral messages shared via specific platforms and applications typically “self-destruct” after they are read, posing unique preservation challenges. Courts have so far taken a skeptical view of ephemeral messaging, particularly in situations where that method may have been chosen specifically to avoid documenting communications.

Cases Addressing Ephemeral Messaging

The seminal case cited for e-discovery preservation mandates that “once a party anticipates litigation, it must suspend its routine document retention/destruction policy and put in place a ‘litigation hold’ to ensure the preservation of relevant documents” (Zubulake v. UBS Warburg LLC, 220 F.R.D. 212, 218 (S.D.N.Y. 2003)).

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37, the failure to preserve information that prejudices a party allows a court to “order measures no greater than necessary to cure the prejudice.” However, “upon a finding that the party acted with intent to deprive another party of the information’s use in the litigation,” a judge may presume lost or unavailable information was unfavorable to the party, instruct the jury that it may or must presume the information was unfavorable or even dismiss the action or enter a default judgment in a particularly egregious case.

And it is that presumption that puts the focus on ephemeral messaging.

Recently in Herzig v. Arkansas Foundation for Medical Care, Inc. (W.D. Ark. July 3, 2019), plaintiffs alleging age discrimination were forced in the early stages of their lawsuit to turn over text-message communications. They then began to communicate using Signal, an app that allowed them to send and receive encrypted text messages and delete them after a short period of time. The judge found various factors supporting the conclusion that the plaintiffs used ephemeral messaging to intentionally destroy evidence, including that the plaintiffs were familiar with technology, were reluctant to turn over relevant information, made misleading initial discovery responses and then manually configured Signal to destroy messages. The judge concluded that the use of ephemeral messaging was “intentional, bad-faith spoliation of evidence.”

Similarly, in Waymo LLC v. Uber Technologies, Inc. (N.D. Cal. Jan. 30, 2018), the judge allowed Waymo, the plaintiff in a case alleging theft of trade secrets, to question Uber at trial about its use of ephemeral messaging so that the jury could decide whether its use was a possible explanation for why Waymo had failed to discover more evidence of Uber’s alleged misconduct. Waymo would be allowed to put evidence in front of the jury that Uber “sought to minimize its ‘paper trail’ by using ephemeral communications.” However, the judge also allowed Uber “to present its own evidence that its use of ephemeral communications showed no wrongdoing, including by pointing out Waymo’s own use of ephemeral communications.”

The issue of ephemeral messaging in litigation is not likely to go away anytime soon. For example, the judge in WeRide Corp. v. Huang, 5:18-CV-07233 (N.D. Cal.), heard oral argument on a motion seeking sanctions related to the use of ephemeral messaging on February 27, 2020 and took the matter under submission with a ruling possible any day.  Meanwhile in the District of Columbia, a judge dismissed claims that the Trump administration’s use of ephemeral messaging systems violated federal laws requiring the creation and maintenance of official records (Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington v. Trump, 2020 WL 619959 (D.D.C February 10, 2020)). While the judge dismissed the case on jurisdictional grounds, she noted the opinion “should not be interpreted to endorse, the challenged practices; nor does it include any finding that the Executive Office is in compliance with its obligations.”

The DOJ’s Evolving View on Ephemeral Messaging

As ephemeral messaging has proliferated, the Department of Justice’s stance has shifted. In 2017, the DOJ took a dim view of ephemeral messaging, stating in its November 2017 Corporate Enforcement Policy that merely using ephemeral messaging made companies ineligible to receive full remediation credit when disclosing potential Foreign Corrupt Practices Act issues.

However, in March 2019, the DOJ amended the same policy to instead require companies to prohibit “the improper destruction or deletion of business records, including implementing appropriate guidance and controls on the use of personal communications and ephemeral messaging platforms that undermine the company’s ability to appropriately retain business records or communications or otherwise comply with the company’s document retention policies or legal obligations.” The policy change focused on the impact on a company’s ability to preserve documents (and, presumably, turn them over to the DOJ in an investigation), rather than using a per se bar. The policy change leaves open the possibility that companies can continue to use ephemeral messaging applications as long as they have done so in a considered and risk-tailored fashion.

Best Practices for Ephemeral Messaging

While the pace of technological advancement means that messaging platforms and applications at issue will keep changing, best practices can help minimize risk related to ephemeral messaging and other electronic communications.

Companies and executives can start by implementing effective electronic records-retention and preservation policies. The policy should specifically cover ephemeral messaging, including preservation requirements relating to them, the identification of any legitimate business need for such messaging (such as employees working in particularly politically dangerous environments) and what platforms and applications are allowed.

Companies and executives then should train employees on these policies. And, upon receiving reasonable notice of litigation, an investigation or other legal action, they should disable any automatic destruction of electronic communications.

Ephemeral messaging is here to stay and will only become more widespread. Being aware of the issues it raises is crucial if companies are to develop and maintain clearly delineated policies and react quickly and transparently in the even an investigation or legal action ensues.


Tags: DOJe-DiscoveryElectronic Communications Compliance
Previous Post

SEC Extends Company Financial Disclosures Amidst COVID Crisis

Next Post

Survey Reveals Misguided Assumptions About Cloud ERP Reporting

Scott Sakiyama

Scott Sakiyama

Scott T. Sakiyama is counsel in the Chicago office of Buckley LLP, where he advises clients on consumer financial services, privacy and cybersecurity-related matters and electronic discovery and represents them in litigation and enforcement actions.

Related Posts

doj sign front

4 Practical Tips for Complying With Monaco Memo

by Jennifer Kennedy Park
January 25, 2023

Preparing for expectations under the Monaco memo is easier said than done, but Jennifer Kennedy Park, an expert in white-collar...

Danske Bank: Money Laundering at Its Finest

Danske Bank: Money Laundering at Its Finest

by Corporate Compliance Insights
January 23, 2023

Something rotten in Denmark: Unpack the $2B settlement Danske Bank made with the U.S. government DOJ, SEC Settlements & Fines...

Paul Weiss Antitrust 2023_f

Paul | Weiss State of U.S. Antitrust Enforcement

by Corporate Compliance Insights
January 23, 2023

2022 was an active year for antitrust enforcement; what will 2023 hold? Where Do We Stand in 2023? The State...

doj new front

DOJ Set to Deploy More Carrots in Corporate Enforcement

by Staff and Wire Reports
January 20, 2023

Companies accused of corporate crimes will have more incentives to disclose misconduct they uncover and cooperate with federal investigations, Assistant...

Next Post
businessman holding virtual ERP in a cloud icon

Survey Reveals Misguided Assumptions About Cloud ERP Reporting

Compliance Job Interview Q&A

Jump to a Topic

AML Anti-Bribery Anti-Corruption Artificial Intelligence (AI) Automation Banking Board of Directors Board Risk Oversight Business Continuity Planning California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) Code of Conduct Communications Management Corporate Culture COVID-19 Cryptocurrency Culture of Ethics Cybercrime Cyber Risk Data Analytics Data Breach Data Governance DOJ Download Due Diligence Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) ESG FCPA Enforcement Actions Financial Crime Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) GDPR HIPAA Know Your Customer (KYC) Machine Learning Monitoring RegTech Reputation Risk Risk Assessment SEC Social Media Risk Supply Chain Technology Third Party Risk Management Tone at the Top Training Whistleblowing
No Result
View All Result

Privacy Policy

Founded in 2010, CCI is the web’s premier global independent news source for compliance, ethics, risk and information security. 

Got a news tip? Get in touch. Want a weekly round-up in your inbox? Sign up for free. No subscription fees, no paywalls. 

Follow Us

Browse Topics:

  • CCI Press
  • Compliance
  • Compliance Podcasts
  • Cybersecurity
  • Data Privacy
  • eBooks Published by CCI
  • Ethics
  • FCPA
  • Featured
  • Financial Services
  • Fraud
  • Governance
  • GRC Vendor News
  • HR Compliance
  • Internal Audit
  • Leadership and Career
  • On Demand Webinars
  • Opinion
  • Resource Library
  • Risk
  • Uncategorized
  • Videos
  • Webinars
  • Well-Being
  • Whitepapers

© 2022 Corporate Compliance Insights

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • About
    • About CCI
    • Writing for CCI
    • NEW: CCI Press – Book Publishing
    • Advertise With Us
  • Explore Topics
    • See All Articles
    • Compliance
    • Ethics
    • Risk
    • FCPA
    • Governance
    • Fraud
    • Internal Audit
    • HR Compliance
    • Cybersecurity
    • Data Privacy
    • Financial Services
    • Well-Being at Work
    • Leadership and Career
    • Opinion
  • Vendor News
  • Career Connection
  • Events
    • Calendar
    • Submit an Event
  • Library
    • Whitepapers & Reports
    • eBooks
    • CCI Press & Compliance Bookshelf
  • Podcasts
  • Videos
  • Subscribe

© 2022 Corporate Compliance Insights

Welcome to CCI. This site uses cookies. Please click OK to accept. Privacy Policy
Cookie settingsACCEPT
Manage consent

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
CookieDurationDescription
cookielawinfo-checbox-analytics11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checbox-functional11 monthsThe cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checbox-others11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy11 monthsThe cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
Functional
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytics
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
Others
Other uncategorized cookies are those that are being analyzed and have not been classified into a category as yet.
SAVE & ACCEPT