What's the ethics of a third party publishing alleged leaked documents like this?
There's an arguable public interest, if the documents are genuine (less if genuine but cherry-picked), but does that override respect for the IP of the company and privacy of named people?
It varies by country but here in the US, we have a long and proud tradition of publishing newsworthy leaks in the media.
> does that override respect for the IP of the company
There are no issues here since US copyright explicitly allows for fair use of copyrighted materials for the purposes of criticism, comment, and news reporting in particular.
> and privacy of named people?
Work-related creations and communications are not personal private information as health records are. Without getting into the espionage and hacking tangents, by and large, if the company can't safeguard its internal output, that's on the company.
Major rightsholders don't respect our rights with regards to copyright (eroding/harming fair use, copyright extensions, etc) so fuck 'em. This is historical sales data. This isn't anything current or sensitive to today. Why are you defending a company that couldn't give two shits less about you, me, or our legal rights?
Journalistic standard. Typically, anything over 15-20 years is considered fair game; even earlier than that, eminent public interest can trump everything else (depending on state legislation and circumstance), but when it's so old there is basically zero chance that anyone will contest reporting on the basis of commercial sensitivity and win in court.
Note this applies to news organizations. Individuals under private agreements (NDA) are a different matter.
IIUC, declassification concerns checks&balances upon powers given to a government that is responsible to citizens.
Sega documents, on the other hand, seem more like fodder for an MBA student's case study, and anecdotes to drop in popular business books. Which seems much lower public interest, to plug into whatever cost:benefit calculation.
I don't have a good sense of what should be done about the Sega documents. (Hypothetically, were I a journalist but knowing only what I do now, and the documents had been leaked to me only, I'd probably try to authenticate them and determine the motives of the leaker, and then I'd have to get advice from others.)
Not specific to the Sega documents, I'm frequently concerned when I see some kind of information leaked/stolen, and the appearance is that everyone automatically considers it free-game for all purposes.
That appearance might only come from a vocal minority, but when no one questions or objects, it looks universal, and like a sociopathic culture.
I'm sad this was downvoted. It's a good question and worthy of discussion. It might be interesting to hear how other similar leaks have been received & treated by journalists in the past. Is there some pattern based on the age of the documents?
There's an arguable public interest, if the documents are genuine (less if genuine but cherry-picked), but does that override respect for the IP of the company and privacy of named people?