[azalemeth]

David Lochridge, who oversaw marine operations at the company and who needed to sign off on the transfer, became convinced that Titan was unsafe. In January 2018, Lochridge sent Rush a quality-control inspection report detailing 27 issues with the vehicle, from questionable O-ring seals on the domes and missing bolts to flammable materials and more concerns about its carbon-fiber hull. Rush fired him the next day. (Although Lochridge later made a whistleblower report to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration about Titan, Rush sued him for breach of contract. The settlement of that lawsuit resulted in Lochridge dropping his complaint, paying OceanGate nearly $10,000, and signing an NDA. Lochridge did not respond to WIRED.)

How is that legal in the US? It is insane that someone who clearly was acting in the interest of the public (albeit the rich, fee-paying public...) should be found at fault for doing something that is clearly morally correct.

I don't normally read Wired, bu this article is both morbidly fascinating and a great tale of human hubris.

[xeromal]

It's a bummer Lochridge tried to halt progress and be fined 10k for opening his mouth. Damn

[kelsey98765431]

The word "found" implies judicial discovery of truth through due process. This was a settlement. Nobody was found to be at fault, the information was highly dangerous and therefore valuable, if you want to eliminate the market of buying silence reform due process protections so they cannot be subverted by so called plea "deals" and so called settlement "agreements".

[axus]

If I read that right, Lochridge was not compensated for silence at all, he paid them $10,000 ?

[marcosdumay]

That's not right.

"Settlement" does really say a judge oversaw the entire thing while a corporation bullied somebody working for the public interest into silence.

[twh270]

The lawsuit was settled out of court (https://www.wsbradio.com/news/national/documents-detail/VUTB...). Reading between the lines, I'm guessing OceanGate (a company with substantial financial resources) would have buried Lochbridge (an individual with substantially fewer financial resources) in lawsuits if he had not settled. (Not to mention the stress, hardship, and real-or-perceived threat of jail time for Lochbridge, should the court find him to be guilty.)

If you're implying that the judge was somehow complicit in helping OceanGate ('oversaw', meaning presided over and made decisions concerning), then please provide evidence of that?

[marcosdumay]

> OceanGate would have buried Lochbridge in lawsuits

So it's not a single judge, but the Judiciary Power collectively was absolutely complicit on the deed.