based on the discovery from this and other cases, everyone at Google believed they were entitled to meet with legal counsel and that all conversations were privileged
I've been a swe at big cos for 10 years and I believe this because that's literally what the lawyers repeatedly informed me was the case. Every significant launch involves a moment where a senior engineer meets with legal counsel and explains the launch and counsel says if they see legal risks with the launch. It's also routine to meet with them early and discuss possible future directions or explain the business value in revisiting a standing policy to see if the benefit to risk is worth it or not.
If you're saying that random engineers aren't actually entitled to meet with legal counsel and have a privileged conversation where they privately ask for directed legal advice, that would be surprising news to me.
As someone who is ignorant of this matter, why aren't the conversations privileged? Is it because the lawyer's represent the company and not the individual personally?
The way I had a lawyer relate this to me was along the lines of:
I ask a lawyer about the legality of specific acts I am considering. This is privileged conversation.
I send an email to someone else telling them to do something (which may be in violation of one or more laws). I copy legal counsel on the email and "request their input on their subject at hand". This is not privileged communication.
