Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

As Former Employees Plotted, Mark Penn Watched: secretly intercepted e-mails

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-06-07 05:08 PM
Original message
As Former Employees Plotted, Mark Penn Watched: secretly intercepted e-mails
Well, he's clever, I will give him that...



Mark Penn

When all is said and done, the abiding lesson of an ugly breakup involving the political powerhouse firm Penn, Schoen and Berland may be this: Be careful what you say using company e-mail.

In early June, the firm of Hillary Clinton’s pollster Mark Penn brought a federal suit against four former employees of his high-powered firm, on the grounds that they were violating their contracts by trying to make off with some his most lucrative corporate clients. In the course of doing so, Penn's representatives submitted more than 100 pages of contracts, excerpts from his company’s employee handbook and—most extraordinarily—electronic communications showing, according to his complaint, that the former employees were “engaging in an orchestrated and illegal plot to sabotage” the business he had founded.

On June 20, a U.S. District Court judge agreed, issuing a restraining order against the former employees from engaging in any more competitive activity. But it is the e-mails—which were subsequently removed from the public record when Mr. Penn voluntarily withdrew his complaint from federal court in Manhattan and refiled it on June 21, practically verbatim, in state Supreme Court in Manhattan—that have become the focus of the fight.

On June 29, a former PSB employee, Mitchell Markel, filed a countersuit claiming that Mr. Penn and his colleagues at the firm had “created a fake e-mail address in Markel’s name and manipulated his BlackBerry Cingular Account so that every time Markel pressed ‘send’ on his personal BlackBerry, every outgoing e-mail from his Yahoo and Global Insights accounts was simultaneously intercepted and sent to the phony address, an address known only to them, and to which only they controlled access.”...

http://www.observer.com/2007/former-employees-plotted-mark-penn-watched
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
hlthe2b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-06-07 05:18 PM
Response to Original message
1. Cleaver... and let's just say very unpleasant
to look at, I must say... Does nasty behavior show up in one's appearance?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-06-07 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. If ugly comments show up in appearences I hope you don't have mirrors
you might scare yourself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hlthe2b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-06-07 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Undeserved retort
truly... It is not his general size, shape or appearance that bothers me, but just like when I look at Cheney, he exudes something very unpleasant. Your nasty comment back to me, though, I'll write off to a misunderstanding of what I was trying to say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-06-07 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. sorry if I misunderstood your comment
we see alot of lookism on this site.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mojambo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-06-07 05:19 PM
Response to Original message
2. This guy is just BEYOND sleazy. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gloria Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-06-07 05:21 PM
Response to Original message
3. Kick this sucker!!! Looks like ROVE redux!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-06-07 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Rove redux is right!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Colobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-06-07 05:22 PM
Response to Original message
5. Sleazy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maribelle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-06-07 05:38 PM
Response to Original message
8. If it was his firm, those employee's emails were his - - not secretly intercepted.
Edited on Sat Oct-06-07 05:39 PM by Maribelle
Nothing sleazy about this extremely common practice.

When you work for someone else, the computer you use, the software that runs on it, the chair you sit on, the telephone you make calls on, all belong to the owner of the firm. If you work for any government agency, then the government owns them.

Most large companies have from time to time needed to extract specific employee's emails from their backups. It happens every day, in every major city, in every state, perhaps.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-06-07 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. Yeah, Penn's a real prince.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maribelle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-06-07 06:01 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. I'm only talking about the retreival of the emails.
I'm trying to figure out all this Penn stuff. Sorry if I was not clear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-06-07 06:02 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. It wasn't just retrieval of email, but an interception.
Stinky :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maribelle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-06-07 06:15 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. When the story talks about those emails ....
Edited on Sat Oct-06-07 06:19 PM by Maribelle
I do not believe the use of the term "interception" is based on a technological process.

That's actually my point. The account was set up, it seems, to blind cc an email address. When the send button was pressed, an electronic message was sent to the original recipient, and lot of electronic copies were probably saved, such as in the email backup server, in the blind cc email address.

To read any of the copies, and even to read the original, you have to retrieve them from the storage area.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 18th 2024, 04:12 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC