Ashley Gjøvikknew which way the wind was blowing . She ’d been warned . Somewhere at Apple , acquaintance and coworkers assured her , a discussion was afoot about how to hale her out of her job . There was even consensus among these ally about the route they would take , that she ’d violated her confidentiality agreement or placed some proprietary plus at risk .
The only thing giving the then - older engineering program manager any interruption — or hope — was that Apple itself did n’t seem concerned about either . Despite placing her on leave and instruct her to quash colleagues , the caller made no endeavor to keep her from viewing any sensible data . “ I had n’t recede any of my score admission , ” Gjøvik said . “ I still had admittance to the next four years of the Mac roadmap . I still had access to seed code for succeeding release . I still had accession to concept review document . ”
Unfortunately for Gjøvik , her friends were correct on the money . The hammer fell in early September with the arrival of an emailed petition to “ speak ” privately about a “ sensitive Intellectual Property matter . ” Right away , emails show , Gjøvik agreed to cooperate , telling the company she was “ Happy to facilitate ! ” Although Apple claimed the subject was serious , no discourse would ever take place . Gjøvik ’s replicate attempts to accede to demands were flatly ignored , emails between the two party show .
Photo: Ashley Gjøvik
Amid the back - and - away , Gjøvik had only one precondition : The conversation should be recorded in writing . give the souring of their relationship , and other on-going legal matters , documenting the investigating seemed prudent , if not necessary — not some gratis attempt to evade examination . But Apple ignored the petition entirely as if she ’d simply said , “ No . ”
“ Since you have take not to participate in the discussion , ” a second e-mail to Gjøvik take , “ we will move frontwards with the data that we have . ” Her entree to company systems was suddenly set aside . Gjøvik tried once more : “ I am decidedly willing to participate in your investigation , ” she wrote , iterate that she wanted everything in photographic print . “ I ’d really like the opportunity to rectify any literal issue , ” she added . “ Please have me lie with what the issue are so I can make a good religion attempt at that . ”
Got a summit ? Email the reporter:[email protected ]
The next email said she ’d beenfired . Among the reasons Apple provided , she ’d “ go to get together ” with what the company called its “ fact-finding process . ” It offered no specifics about the “ matter ” of “ intellectual property , ” which Apple inculpate she ’d somehow violated . virtually a week would pass on before she ’d get wind anything more .
Gjøvik , 35 , had become persona non grata at Apple soon after raising vexation internally this springtime about the gauzy toxins long known to have tainted the land beneath her Sunnyvale office . Among other defiler in the seventies , a microwave constituent Almighty that once occupied the site had let a slurry of loony toons , heavy metals , and industrial resolution soak into the land . A “ groundwater plume ” made of toxic waste once hold out for more than a mile , cover schools and hundreds of homes . One of the more dangerous compounds was trichloroethane , easily known as TCE .
Throughout the mid - twentieth C , TCE was widely administered to dental patient and women in childbirth , inhaled as a room to allay pain . Today , it ’s a known carcinogen associated with childhood leukemia and small birthing weight , and other birth defects .
The ground beneath Gjøvik ’s office — know internally as Stewart 1 — was excavated in the mid-1980s and backfilled with gravel and concrete , one of several efforts to mitigate the contaminant . In 2014 , the Environmental Protection Agency view as the cure sufficient . But a class later , air samples were taken at nearby home and schools and divulge TCE vapors had again reached “ unacceptable levels . ” In 2019 , a new EPA field of study stated the “ vapor intrusion ” effect had since been addressed but , it warned , a long - term fix still had to be assessed .
Apple , which has its own history ofpoorlyhandlingtoxic barren in Sunnyvale , did not carry decent testing , according to Gjøvik , whose concerns about the noxious compound grew after she call up having once fainted at work for reason she could not at the time explicate . She want to know why Apple had n’t done more to keep employees abreast of the berth and asked to talk to a wellness and safety manager . Notes she record during the conversation , by and by shared with the EPA , stated : “ Apple decided no sound necessary . ”
of late in the eventide on Sept. 15 , less a week after Gjøvik was fire , a missive pop up in her inbox . It was from a high - power legal philosophy firm , O’Melveny & Myers LLP . Its previous client include Donald Trump , whom the attorney defend over the “ monumental cozenage ” known as Trump University . “ On behalf of Apple Inc. , ” the alphabetic character began . What followed was the first time Gjøvik learned any details about the “ noetic property ” she ’d been accused of leaking .
The letter enquire her to remove “ sure image and video ” that she ’d send on social medium — a encroachment , it claimed , of a confidentiality agreement she ’d signed six years ago , after starting at Apple . It did n’t percentage point to any sensitive document . None of the textile , in fact , was in particular relevant to the charges she ’d place against the company . Instead , it listed two tweets . The first included a photo of Gjøvik get by her own earphone .
The 2nd tweet had never garner much aid , and there was a upright reason for it : The information it hold back was n’t new . Nor was it particularly newsworthy . Had it been anything otherwise , one of the stacks of reporters following Gjøvik would ’ve noticed . They ’re reliably ravenous — even for the most trifling of Apple rumors .
The photo of Gjøvik hold in tweet no . 1 was captured by an app called Glimmer , which is undivided to Apple employees . The app takes light videos of users whenever they pick up their phones , test the company conducts to ameliorate its facial recognition engineering . Tweet no . 2 was a handful of e-mail screenshots bid Gjøvik to volunteer for an “ in - person study ” in which “ high-pitched - answer 3D scans ” would be direct of her ear . Both tweet were cast by Gjøvik to guard company e-mail accounts and other details .
Gjøvik erase the tweet as asked , but retained counsel to reply to Apple . David L. Hecht , one of the land ’s direct letters patent litigator , sent the company a letter on her behalf , dismantling Apple ’s claim moment by bit . “ While I see that Apple is not opposed to taking strong-growing litigation postures ( and indeed has a history of doing so ) , ” Hecht write , “ I prompt you of your honorable duties as an lawyer regarding the assertion of claim that have no basis in fact . ”
Hecht noted , for instance , that the email shared publicly by Gjøvik were neither labeled confidential nor contained anything “ that could be weigh secret or otherwise proprietary . ”
“ The mail image of the e-mail merely noted what was already fuck to the public , ” he enunciate . “ It is no secret that Apple has been scanning a wide range of a function of human ears to perfect its various AirPods products . ” Hecht place to the fact that Apple ’s vice president of Cartesian product marketing , Greg Joswiak , had spoken in public about scanning masses ’s ears : “ We had done work with Stanford to 3D - scan century of dissimilar ears and ear styles and shapes in gild to make a design that would work out as a one - size of it answer across a broad set of the population , ” Joswiaktold Wiredin 2020 for an clause touting the “ runaway success ” of Apple ’s AirPods .
The picture taken by Glimmer — shared withthe Vergein August for a debut report of the app ’s existence — were also not the dimension of Apple , Hecht said . Had it in reality tried , Apple could not have landed a copyright . Copyrighted works under U.S. jurisprudence must be “ original noetic creation of the author , ” he noted .
“ You have also not allege how mere image of Ms. Gjøvik , in her home , taken by the Glimmer app , on Ms. Gjøvik ’s own phone , could qualify as confidential and/or proprietary info under her [ correspondence ] , ” Hecht added .
Gjøvik characterized the app as spyware . “ It was take photos of me in my nursing home , in my bathroom , in bed , anywhere I had my headphone , ” she said . “ And it stored these photos somewhere and upload them sometimes to some office — they did n’t tell us much . ”
Apple did not react to a request for comment .
Gjøvik had signed a consent grade permit the app to be installed on the phone , but she say such calls to Tennessean are often treat as a “ loyalty psychometric test . ” employee , she said , are expected to participate . “ Or we ’ll be take questions like , ‘ Why are n’t you doing this to help us with these products ? ’ ” ( The Vergereportedsimilar take a calendar month before Gjøvik was provoke . )
Gjøvik order she still catches the app — formerly know as “ Gobbler”—trying to access to her iCloud , even though she ’s no longer at the company . “ Whenever I see it , I still squinch . ”
Though not observe by the letter of the alphabet , the Glimmer app is reminiscent of another right of first publication pillow slip known popularly as the “ Monkey selfie . ” During a misstep into an Indonesian forest in 2008 , a lensman on purpose left his camera on a tripod , attracting the notice of a crested black macaque . The endangered animate being had picked up the television camera and reportedly snapped century of photos , include many selfies . Because the pic were after partake in wide online without the lensman ’s permission , the incident spurred far-flung debate among copyright wonks over who actually have the delineation . The U.S. Copyright Office eventually weighed in , sustain that , in the U.S. at least , photos taken by non - humans were not eligible to right of first publication by anyone .
On their face , Apple ’s claims against Gjøvik appear whole pretextual , Hecht told Gizmodo by sound . “ In terms of what I ’ve seen , yeah , they were looking for a reason to fire her , ” he said .
Bringing on Hecht was objectively a wise move by Gjøvik . He ’s one of the few attorney who can claim to have in reality beaten the notoriously litigious tech giant . Only month ago , his firm — Hecht Partners LLP — forced Apple intosettling a right of first publication lawsuitbrought against a party called Correllium , the maker of security system creature used to discover defect in iPhone software . Apple , which had failed previously to larn the companionship , backed down days before the trial would have begin .
“ They were very upset that she was , you have intercourse , whistle - blowing , ” Hecht state , likening Apple ’s investigating of Gjøvik as a hunting for a problem that did n’t exist . “ They ’re looking to kind of sully her , you love , happen some kind of story that works for them , some kind of tale that she did something wrong . ”
In August , Gjøvik filedchargeswith the U.S. National Labor Relations Board alleging revenge for her prior complaints . Gjøvik says she was also constrict into discuss an incident of sexual harassment after briefly mentioning the incident during an unrelated get together with an employee resourcefulness official . The only action the fellowship took , she said , was to identify her to the soul she ’d accused . Before being provoke , Gjøvik had also joined other woman at the society who spoke publicly about controversy at the ship’s company , let in their experience with sexism and other forms of discrimination .
Gjøvik ’s charges against Apple are interpret by another lawyer , Erika Angelos Heath , whose specialty lies in employ contract and wrongful termination claim . Legal activity against Apple , she sound out , is being weighed by her and her node .
“ California police is highly protective of employee who face revenge after descend forwards to complain about sealed issues affect the workplace , such as discrimination and health & guard matter , ” Heath enunciate in a argument . “ Our case is still in the investigative level , but Ms. Gjovik alleges that Apple used purported violations of its rational property accord as a pretext for retaliating against her while the companionship was in the physical process of investigating her complaint about molestation and favoritism . ”
Unemployed , Gjøvik is now in her fourth year of police force school day at Santa Clara University where she ’s received awards and been write on public health , privacy , and human rights . She ’s also act with a police force center that aids refugee struggling to navigate the res publica ’s asylum process . Regardless of whether her rift with Apple ever break in her favor , the experience , for her , has been an oculus - unfastener .
“ The first step to get Apple to change its finish is to allow its employees to be able to speak out openly . That ’s footfall one . We want them to finger like they can talk to lawyers and the government activity and each other , ” she enunciate .
Without , she summate , being elicit .
Daily Newsletter
Get the dear tech , science , and acculturation news in your inbox daily .
News from the time to come , delivered to your present .
Please select your hope newssheet and submit your email to upgrade your inbox .
You May Also Like
