Hacker News Reader

I also don't think the openness on the calendar is the issue, more the stalking part. Just like how seeing where people go on the streets is natural, but sneaking behind someone everyday up to their house becomes something else altogether.

View on HN

It's really neither. It's the part where information on someone else's calendar was disseminated to an external third party.

That is not what the note said. It said that screenshots made their way outside the company.

I would associate that with an email account that wasn't the work account, a printed page that was taken off-premises, a non-work cloud-hosted storage service, or to a computer that wasn't a work computer. It does not say that the place the information was sent to was any third party.

It could turn out that the information was sent to a third party, but that has not (yet) been claimed.

Ah, I follow. "Outside the company" could mean "cold storage."

Yup! I assume that at this point general counsel is involved in everything Google says publicly; it's then worth nitpicking at the exact details of what has or has not been admitted, because legal folk definitely have!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com