“Whatever means necessary”: Deel alleges Rippling ran coordinated espionage campaign
Court filing claims stolen trade secrets helped Rippling launch core product line.
The increasingly bitter legal war between HR technology giants Deel and Rippling has registered its latest chapter, with Deel’s newest court filing accusing its rival of running a coordinated and illegal corporate espionage campaign to copy its flagship product and close a widening competitive gap.
In an amended complaint filed in California on Tuesday, Deel alleges that Rippling, acting under the direction of CEO Parker Conrad, embedded a spy in its customer platform for six months under a false identity, systematically siphoning proprietary product data and internal documentation. The filing claims that Rippling’s actions were not rogue but part of an institutional effort to replicate Deel’s global Employer of Record (EOR) offering.
“Rippling’s true colors have now come to light—and the truth is sinister,” Deel wrote in the filing, framing its accusations as part of a broader pattern of dishonesty allegedly tied to Conrad’s previous startup scandal. Deel says the espionage operation was directed at the highest levels of Rippling management and accuses the company of victimizing other HR tech firms as well.
The complaint centers on a Rippling employee, Brett Alexander Johnson, whom Deel identifies as a “Competitive Intelligence Manager.” Johnson allegedly created a fake business entity to gain access to Deel’s platform as a supposed client. From May to November 2024, Johnson logged in at least 58 times as a customer administrator, downloading or screen-recording sensitive materials related to Deel’s pricing, health benefit policies, compliance templates, and regional contract terms in over 30 countries.
When Johnson needed clarifications, he allegedly contacted Deel’s customer service team under false pretenses, asking pointed questions about legal protections, jurisdiction-specific rules, and misclassification protections, all while feeding the information back to Rippling.
According to Deel, by the time Johnson abruptly deleted his account, on orders from Rippling, he had allegedly stolen 57 internal documents and detailed structural knowledge about how Deel’s platform operates globally.
“The directive was clear: penetrate Deel through whatever means necessary,” the company alleges, “and with utter disregard for the law.”
While Deel claims profitability and $1 billion in annual revenue, it says Rippling continues to burn through investor cash without achieving sustainable margins. Deel alleges that the stolen information directly enabled Rippling to build a competing EOR product in areas where it was trailing far behind.
This latest salvo follows earlier court filings that already painted a portrait of high-stakes legal trench warfare. Deel has accused Rippling of financially supporting a fired employee who admitted leaking company documents, calling him a “paid witness” and demanding unredacted versions of his agreements with Rippling.
Meanwhile, Rippling accuses Deel of recruiting that same employee to act as a mole in its Dublin office, allegations Deel has dismissed as retaliatory and defamatory.
Rippling has yet to formally respond to the new filing. In the past, it has denied all wrongdoing and positioned its original California suit as a defense against alleged corporate espionage by Deel.
An official at Rippling told CTech: “Rippling is unwavering in our commitment to fair competition and the highest ethical standards. We expect full compliance as described clearly in our written policies. By contrast, Deel has never denied the allegations that its CEO recruited and managed a paid spy inside Rippling who stole our trade secrets – only to then try hiding the spy in Dubai when caught. Notably, in this new complaint Deel backtracks from some of its original bogus claims, showing once again that with Deel every accusation is just an admission of its own misconduct.”
Rippling first brought a lawsuit against Deel in California in March. Deel has since moved to dismiss that case and have it transferred to Ireland. In parallel, Deel filed a separate civil suit against Rippling in Delaware, where the newly revealed allegations appear as part of an amended complaint.
