Increasingly due to the easy means of transferring data, all types of businesses in today's age are confronted with the issue of protecting the sensitive data of their businesses from being stolen by their employees, specifically there ex-employees. Possession of such sensitive data within the wrong hands could cost a company a competitive business or a product, as well as execution of their future business strategies by a rival company. While it is also important to mention that, the possession or ill use of their ex-employers sensitive data, may only be because to take revenge out of spite and cause bitterness amongst them (www.sgrlaw.com/, 2006).
This paper highlights the possible solutions that business or individuals can avail in case of possible vindication of sensitive data by former employees.
Discussion
The preceding section highlights the main premise of our case, which is about Extract PLC based in the United Kingdom. Extract PLC is a research-oriented firm, working on the development in the imaging technique to measure the volume of oil that can be extracted from a type of stone known as shale. For this technological purpose, Extract PLC hired Vitaly, a competent scientist to work on this research project along with other scientists. This group of scientists had the core-patented data of the company for their research, at their disposal. In some time, one of the colleagues of Vitaly names Taras was promoted to become the head of this project, and soon after wards, disagreements related to work flow of the project caused many arguments amongst them both.
Soon after, Vitaly resigned and joined a rival Canadian group called Digg Inc., which in a short time introduced a breakthrough in the shale oil extraction technology, which originally was planned by Extract PLC. On inspection, Taras found that one of the key set of data relevant to their research experiment have been deleted from the company's computers. It is now after the announcement of Digg Inc., that both Taras and the company are now seeking possible remedies to address this issue and assess their options regarding what appropriate measures to take against Vitaly and Digg Inc. Some of the possible remedies are discussed below.
Precautionary Measures
Frowen (2010) states the possible precautionary measures that can be undertaken by an employer includes clearly establishing and communicating the companies policies against content privacy and the measures that it would undertake in case any employee violates these data privacy policies. This would make all the employees vigilant that their official office communication is being supervised. Extract PLC must also incorporate immediately such stringent policies, to hamper similar data theft in the future. Other key measures would include banning of external hard drives such as USB's, Floppy disks and CD's in all the computer systems across the company so that no terminated or current employee could store this valuable data and leave the company's premises.
Remedies
Shaffer (2008) suggests that a company, like Extract PLC, when completely verifying the fact that their sensitive data ...