Every company that supports employees using their personal devices (phones, tablets, etc) as work devices should read the complaint carefully.
If it's the companies phone, they can request it be returned. VanderZanden was using his personal phone while at Lyft. When he left, he just sold it. The problem is that it puts Lyft in an awkward position: they are requesting he turn over his personal device so that they can analyze it to confirm no confidential information remains.
"VanderZanden provided no explanation as to why he sold his phone.... it's an odd thing for a high-net worth individual to do..."
I'd probably tell them to stuff it too, it's my phone.
Also, I find it interesting that the complaint is also against one to ten "unnamed defendants". I didn't know you could do that.
This is one of the reasons that decent sized startups should be giving important people a dedicated company-owned device if those people need access to sensitive company info from their phones.
In the recent past I've had to fight for this with a previous employer who thought it was acceptable to impose security restrictions on personal devices that are used to access company info. Many people just stopped accessing company info from their phones - they would prefer to be able to root / jailbreak their phones if they choose to.
Simple thought experiment: your competitor is caught red-handed doing the thing you are pondering, how do you think it will reflect on them?
Unnamed defendants are common in litigation in the early stages. It's easier to amend the details of the complaint than to join additional parties to it after the case has started moving so if you have an expectation of edintifying more defendants you might as well mention that from the outset - otherwise you're liable to get derailed in obtuse procedural litigation.
Android too, but android has mtm software like nine or touchdown that act as virtual devices for exchange access. If the exchange account is terminated, only the virtual device gets wiped.
If it's the companies phone, they can request it be returned. VanderZanden was using his personal phone while at Lyft. When he left, he just sold it. The problem is that it puts Lyft in an awkward position: they are requesting he turn over his personal device so that they can analyze it to confirm no confidential information remains.
"VanderZanden provided no explanation as to why he sold his phone.... it's an odd thing for a high-net worth individual to do..."
I'd probably tell them to stuff it too, it's my phone.
Also, I find it interesting that the complaint is also against one to ten "unnamed defendants". I didn't know you could do that.