Sarah Wynn-Williams, who served as Meta's director of global public policy from 2011 to 2017, has filed a federal lawsuit challenging the company's gag order preventing her from discussing her memoir "Careless People", an explosive insider account of CEO Mark Zuckerberg and other executives at the social media giant.

The lawsuit, filed Thursday in Northern California federal court, claims Meta's arbitration order barring Wynn-Williams from speaking about the company or promoting her bestselling book is invalid. It further alleges that the severance agreement she signed upon her 2017 departure was executed under duress.

A gag order was issued against Wynn-Williams and her legal representatives, prohibiting any criticism of the company or promotion of her book.

According to the suit, the company has been spying on her all the time, and its members have attended events she participated in publicly, taken pictures of her, and recorded cases where she did not criticise Meta to comply with the gag order.

The company even opposed Wynn-Williams’ attendance at a UK arts and literature festival, which she joined but did not say anything at, since other speakers there criticised Meta. This spying campaign, the lawsuit claims, is an intimidation strategy used to silence whistleblowers.

Each alleged breach by Wynn-Williams of the non-disparagement clause will cost Meta $50,000 in damage claims. This legal challenge portrays the financial threat as a form of intentional duress. Wynn-Williams wants the court to overturn the arbitration and severance agreements completely.

Meta issued a press release stating that Wynn-Williams was "trying to use the courts to sell books", despite an arbitrator deciding previously that this violates her agreement.

Meta believes that her memoir is "disconnected from reality, disparaging and filled with falsehoods". It does not comment on the specific charges against Zuckerberg.

The case raises fundamental questions about severance agreements' enforceability and corporate power over former employees' speech. Wynn-Williams' legal team argues, "Meta is pursuing Ms Wynn-Williams at the expense of free speech...to strike fear into the heart of anyone else who dares to consider speaking the truth about Meta's unlawful and abusive practices in the public interest."