Raytheon Watch

It's Not the Crime in the Streets,
It's the Crime in the Corporate Suites

Raytheon's Suit Against Employees For
Posting Messages On The Internet
May Mark The Arrival Of A Brave New World Of Corporate Censorship

May 25, 1999

The dust has settled on Raytheon's suit against 21 "John Does" who posted messages on the internet using online handles to obscure their identity. Using discovery powers granted to litigants in lawsuits, Raytheon was able pierce the veil of anonymity provided through the use of screen names and identify employees who had posted messages on a Yahoo message board. Four employees were reportedly fired or forced to resign, and other employees were cowed into silence through "counseling" sessions with corporate representatives.

Based on allegations that the information posted on the message board was "proprietary," Raytheon filed the suit against 21 "netizens" whom it believed to be employees. As it turned out much of the information alleged to be "proprietary" had already been publicly disclosed, according to reports in the Boston Globe and elsewhere.

As part of its effort to track down employees who had posted messages, Raytheon apparently issued subpoenas to Yahoo asking for disclosure of the e-mail addresses of participants in Yahoo's "RTNB" message board. This electronic bulletin board is publicly accessible and generally involved discussion from Raytheon union members, stock traders, management and employees. Participants chose a screen name, such as RSCDeepthroat, SadNTexas, or Winstoncar, which can be other than their true identity. But, in order to register for a screen name, Yahoo requires that participants provide an e-mail address. Once Raytheon had obtained e-mail addresses from Yahoo, it was able to track down and identify employees who had posted messages it objected to. According to messages posted after the action, Raytheon appears to have been successful in stifling the free flow of information on the message board. On the other hand, internet sites critical of Raytheon, including this one, have appeared in response to its heavy handed censorship.

Some of the actual filings in the lawsuit are posted on the "Raytheon Update" website operated by private investigator James George of Haverill, Massachusetts. He has recently posted Raytheon's "Notice of Voluntary Dismissal," terminating the law suit.

Raytheon could be liable for "abuse of process" if it can be established that it filed the lawsuit without probable cause and for an improper purpose - such as to silence legitimate public discussion. Likewise, its lawyers, from the pricey Boston law firm of Hale and Dorr, could be subject to disciplinary action if they violated ethical restrictions by abusing discovery procedures or helping Raytheon to abuse process by pursuing baseless and improper claims. So far, there haven't been widespread reports of any counter litigation or backlash against either Raytheon on its employees.

Raytheon's apparent intention to monitor the internet activities of its 100,000 employees, and to sue them for damages if it doesn't like what they have to say, will no doubt have a chilling effect on free speech at the company, and in the wider on line community.

Sources for this story included:

Raytheon Wants IDs of Net Chatters

By Leslie Miller
Associated Press Writer
Friday, March 5, 1999; 1:17 a.m. EST

Raytheon Watch

is a project sponsored by

J. Whitfield Larrabee
& Associates

A People's Law Firm

Representing Employees and Whistleblowers

larrabee@gis.net

free initial telephone and e-mail consultations
(please see caution below on e-mail interception)

Caution: Because of the risk of interception, any information that you wish to keep confidential should not be communicated via e-mail. Although our firm will treat information that you send us as privileged and confidential, if you desire, the public nature of the internet creates a risk of third party interception. E-mail sent out over a network owned by an employer may be the property of the employer and may be recovered through copies stored on the server under the employer's control.

Notice and Disclaimer: This page may be considered an advertisement under the rules of Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. The information provided at this site is for educational purposes only, and should not be considered legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is established through use of the materials on this site or through an initial consultation. You should only consider that an attorney client-relationship with J. Whitfield Larrabee & Associates is established upon execution of a written fee agreement.

J. Whitfield Larrabee & Associates

© Whit Larrabee, All Rights Reserved 1999

This page has been visited times since January 1, 1999

cases excepted in all courts in Boston, Cambridge, Brookline and Eastern Massachusetts