Amazon has responded to the Federal Trade Commission’s allegations about executives’ use of the Signal encrypted communications app, stating that it is not suitable for substantive business discussions. The company emphasized that quick messages between executives are not the place for meaningful discussions and that Signal was used for quick exchanges on sensitive topics like public relations or human resources. Amazon argues that there is no evidence of material evidence being lost or evidence that Signal was used to conceal information.
The FTC had argued that Amazon executives deleted many Signal messages during the pre-complaint investigation, indicating that relevant information may have been destroyed. The agency also requested detailed instructions given to executives about preserving messages sent via Signal and similar apps. Amazon opposed the motion, claiming lawyer-client privilege and stated that it has acted properly in response to the FTC’s demands to preserve relevant evidence. The company voluntarily provided the FTC with details about executives’ Signal conversations, including 2,900 screenshots.
Amazon founder Jeff Bezos was quoted in a deposition as saying that discussing substantive matters through messaging formats like Signal would be akin to business malpractice as it is too short of a messaging format. Amazon has cooperated fully with the FTC’s investigation by providing 1.7 million documents from various sources, including email, internal messaging applications, and laptops, as well as over 100 terabytes of data. The initial use of Signal by executives was traced back to the suspected hacking of Bezos’ phone in 2018, prompting him to seek more secure ways of sending messages.
The dispute between Amazon and the FTC stems from an antitrust lawsuit filed against the company in September, alleging that Amazon illegally uses its power in e-commerce and online marketplaces to favor its own interests. The FTC has raised concerns about possible spoliation of evidence, accusing Amazon of deleting Signal messages and not instructing employees to preserve them until after the investigation began. Amazon maintains that there is no evidence of substantial discussions on Signal and that it has made efforts to provide the FTC with relevant information on executives’ conversations.
Overall, Amazon has opposed the FTC’s motion to compel the disclosure of detailed instructions given to executives about preserving messages sent via Signal, citing lawyer-client privilege. The company argues that it has gone out of its way to provide the agency with necessary information and that there is no evidence of material discussions on Signal. Amazon believes that the offhand private comments between executives on Signal are not as revealing as carefully crafted memos meant for wider internal distribution. The legal battle between Amazon and the FTC continues as both sides present their arguments regarding the use of Signal and the preservation of evidence.
