Macy’s Ignores Govt. Subpoena For CRM Records In Lead-Tainted Necklace Criminal Case
Written by Fred J. AunApril 1st, 2009
Macy's, accused by the Los Angeles District Attorney's Office of selling lead-tainted necklaces, has taken a confrontational—and controversial—stance: It is refusing to share its CRM databases with the government, even if it means that consumers and children who are at risk of lead poisoning can't be contacted. Macy's has declined to comment on the situation—other than an E-mail to reporters saying that it won't comment—so the only version of events is coming from the D.A.'s office, which says that Macy's has provided no explanation whatsoever.
This leaves open the question of whether Macy's is refusing to turn the files over for legal—or other—reasons or if it simply cannot access and thereby produce such records, for technological and logistical reasons. But Los Angeles Deputy District Attorney Daniel Wright said he is leaning more toward the "won't" as opposed to the "can't" theory, at least for some of the requested records. "It's aggravating," Wright said. "It's inexplicable to me."
This Story Is Only Available For Premium Subscribers. Click Or Login In Below To Read The Rest Of This Story.
Already a Subscriber? Login Here
Pages: 1 2
One Comment | Read Macy’s Ignores Govt. Subpoena For CRM Records In Lead-Tainted Necklace Criminal Case
Leave a Reply
Readers, specifically those who want to comment on a story:
Our Comment SPAM system is getting very aggressive these days and has been blocking legitimate comments. If you post a comment and don't see it appear within 2 hours or so, can you please send a heads-up to customer-service@storefrontbacktalk.com? Ideally, please include the time you posted the comment. That will allow us to try and hunt for it. Thanks! P.S. We're working on fixing the system, but we don't want to lose any valuable comments in the meantime.
Our Comment SPAM system is getting very aggressive these days and has been blocking legitimate comments. If you post a comment and don't see it appear within 2 hours or so, can you please send a heads-up to customer-service@storefrontbacktalk.com? Ideally, please include the time you posted the comment. That will allow us to try and hunt for it. Thanks! P.S. We're working on fixing the system, but we don't want to lose any valuable comments in the meantime.
-Christine
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:57 am
Given that all companies, esp ones of the stature of Macey’s, are required to be PCI compliant, I would put forth another reason that they may not be able to produce the info that the Attorney general wanted: masked CC# or that they do not even have any of the CC# stored at all.
Another more sinister reason may be that they are still not PCI compliant and are storing all CC# in plain text? This would be a good reason to NOT hand over their CRM (strictly coming from a PCI perspective).