The New Rules for Keeping Secrets

• Share

(3 of 3)

Businesses are quicker than ever to cut off fired employees' access to computer systems and more willing than ever to go to court. This year Silicon Valley celebrated a landmark prosecution in which, after four years, Avant Corp. and seven of its current and former executives were forced to pay $220 million in fines and restitution for stealing secrets from a rival tech firm. Avant got information by paying off an engineer from the targeted firm.

Of course, there was never a golden age in which all secrets were fiercely protected. (Think of Ambrose Bierce's definition of "confidante" back in 1911: "One entrusted by A with the secrets of B, confided by him to C".) Amid all the erosion of old protections, there are still, however, plenty of people playing by the old rules--or their own rules.

Last week, even as the A.B.A. and the Catholic Church were coming out in favor of looser lips, free-lance journalist Vanessa Leggett remained in prison in Texas for refusing to turn over her confidential reporting on an unsolved Houston society murder. Texas doesn't have a "shield law," as some states do, protecting journalists from court orders to hand over their notes, and her First Amendment arguments have so far been rejected. Leggett, who could be imprisoned for up to 18 months, is a powerful reminder that no matter what the rules, there's still one sure way to keep a secret. Don't talk.

--With reporting by Rebecca Winters/New York