NetApp has initiated an explosive legal action that reads like a corporate thriller, targeting Jón Stefánsson, one of its former senior executives. The lawsuit alleges that Stefánsson secretly developed a competing business venture while still collecting his salary from NetApp. Weeks after leaving his post, he allegedly sold this new company to VAST Data, a direct competitor, for an undisclosed sum. The case, filed in federal court in Florida, details a narrative of corporate betrayal that includes serious legal claims coupled with an audacious, dark-comedy reference to the 1999 cult classic film “Office Space.” The outcome of this high-stakes litigation could significantly impact the fortunes of two major players in enterprise infrastructure: NetApp and VAST Data. It also brings to light crucial questions regarding the tremendous influence and power a key technology executive holds within the highly competitive cloud AI and data infrastructure sectors.
The only confirmed details are that NetApp filed suit against Stefánsson, its former senior vice president and chief technical officer, on November 6, 2025. The core of the suit is the allegation that Stefánsson deceived NetApp, misappropriated its intellectual property, and subsequently leveraged that proprietary information when he accepted a position as VAST Data’s general manager of cloud solutions. Furthermore, NetApp successfully requested and was granted a temporary restraining order (TRO) against Stefánsson. The TRO restricts him from participating in any activities related to products, services, or “similar technologies that Stefánsson created or developed while employed at NetApp.” It is critical to note that VAST Data is only an incidentally impacted party; NetApp has not accused the rival company of any wrongdoing. The focus of the litigation is solely on the purported deceptive actions of a departing key executive who happened to join VAST Data to help build a competing product.
Jón Thorgrímur Stefánsson, widely recognized in the industry as “Jonsi,” was not a minor employee; he was a pivotal figure at NetApp. Throughout his eight-year tenure, he rose through the ranks to become the company’s Chief Technology Officer and Senior Vice President. His responsibilities were vast, covering the entirety of NetApp’s cloud operations. Stefánsson was responsible for overseeing NetApp’s first-party cloud storage products, setting the overarching cloud strategy, and managing critical relationships with major hyperscalers, including Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud, and Amazon Web Services. Essentially, Stefánsson had unrestricted access to NetApp’s most valuable assets: its confidential information, proprietary innovations, core intellectual property, and essential business relationship data—the company’s “crown jewels.”
According to the complaint filed by NetApp, the alleged trouble began to surface in early 2025. The filing claims that in January of that year, a former NetApp employee, who is now on the board of rival VAST Data, sent a cryptic text message to another ex-NetApp employee that stated simply, “Jonsi is in.” Shortly after, the same individual allegedly sent a second message containing only an image of a red stapler. For those unfamiliar with the cult-favorite movie “Office Space,” the red Swingline stapler is the film’s most potent symbol, cherished by the character Milton, a mistreated office worker. After enduring excessive corporate abuse, Milton eventually burns down the office building, and the stapler symbolizes workplace frustration, a spirit of rebellion, and ultimate revenge against corporate employers.
The choice of the stapler imagery and the alleged name of Stefánsson’s secret venture—not disclosed in the available article summary—was, NetApp contends, not a subtle one. The company alleges this was an inside joke, a calculated reference meant to mock and taunt NetApp as Stefánsson was allegedly making his way out the door and into a competing role with the rival firm. The lawsuit positions this inside joke as evidence of a premeditated and malicious attempt to undermine his former employer.
Reference:
