Yes, Qwest (the telecom, formerly US West) resisted and fought tooth and nail to not cooperate.
Their CEO was prosecuted to hell and back for daring to do this, and the company was forced to sell to a competitor. Nobody even remembers his name anymore, few people even remember Qwest.
His name is Joseph Nacchio. If this story is true (and it has been around for many years), he is a hero for standing up for transparent governance, and the privacy of Qwest's customers.
I don't know anything about it, but I think there may still be related litigation going on.
Edit: maybe not. Wikipedia says he was convicted in 2007.
However, I was given an NDA regarding something that sounded related at some point after that, so...
You skipped the part where he acquired a competitor under false accounting, contributing to monopolization, as dumping his stock with irregular sales while to profit from value NSA contracts before the public knew they were canceled. Should a CEO make a fortune selling stock while the company loses 90% of its market cap?
Yeah it's funny how he was the only corrupt CEO in all of corporate America during that time. So weird how nobody else besides him and Martha Stewart ever got prosecuted for insider trading despite it happening ALL THE TIME EVERY DAY EVERYWHERE.
> Former Qwest CEO Joseph Nacchio, alleged in appeal documents that the NSA requested that Qwest participate in its wiretapping program more than six months before September 11, 2001. Nacchio recalls the meeting as occurring on February 27, 2001. Nacchio further claims that the NSA cancelled a lucrative contract with Qwest as a result of Qwest's refusal to participate in the wiretapping program. Nacchio surrendered April 14, 2009 to a federal prison camp in Schuylkill, Pennsylvania to begin serving a six-year sentence for an insider trading conviction. The United States Supreme Court denied bail pending appeal the same day.
He was happy to get paid hundreds of millions of dollars for spying on his customers, but didn't want to spy on his customers? What did he think those contracts were for?
I don't know what the lesson is after reading his wikipedia page. His refusal to cooperate with the NSA seems like a non-sequitur as a response to the whole insider trading and fraud thing. I mean, if the prosecution was revenge, well, ok, but I can't connect the dots to how that makes him not guilty.
