[jb613]

"Going to be interesting watching this one play out."

I suspect, access of "14,000 highly confidential and proprietary files shortly before his resignation" will play a major role in swaying the deciders. Experience tells us that not all of those 14k were critical, what if it had be 1 or 2 critical design docs? In a different or future case, we may see that happen. Corps have incentive to reduce competitors, but now may start recognizing the potential leverage they have - "Our network logs show Joe accessed our main design doc 1 week before he left for company doing similar work!".

[tracker1]

Yeah, so the guy happened to do a git clone a few weeks before he left the company, that may have been related to work, and now gets this. I don't know about the "covering his tracks" part though.

[jsjohnst]

I get the point you're trying to make and Google is rather vague on details, but I highly doubt it was as simple as a git clone. If for no other reason, it's generally considered an anti-pattern to have 10gb of content in a repo (not including revisions, but just content).

They were also very specific in the legal documents about how he "covered his tracks", I'd recommend reading it rather than the cliff notes version linked here.