The Times is asking this morning, and Condé Nast isn't saying. The only substantive comment anyone at the magazine group would give the Times was concerned Hollywood mogul Michael Ovitz, who was featured and supposedly obtained the pre-publication copy of Vanity Fair.

If Condé Nast executives at waffling on whether to keep the IT guy, Wayne Reynolds, they would be well-advised to read the Huffington Post's account of how he sounded on the stand in the trial of Pellicano, his self-described surrogate father:

As Mr. Reynolds admitted that he'd lied to the F.B.I. in 2003 and tried to point out that he was telling the truth today, Mr. Pellicano [representing himself] looked tempted to do a victory lap. At last, success....

Bolstered by having finally asked a good cross-examination question, Mr. Pellicano actually began to seriously do some damage to Mr. Reynolds credibility. "Didn't you use bugging equipment to overhear your supervisor at Conde Nast?" Mr. Pellicano asked, sounding as if he was sure of the answer. As Mr. Reynolds tried to fake laugh the question off with a strong "no," Mr. Pellicano went in for the kill. "Didn't you tell another employee of Mr. Pellicano's that you'd bugged your supervisor's office?" Again, Mr. Reynolds answered "no," but it seemed possible that the former son had learned a few things from the father.

Finally, Mr. Pellicano seemed to answer the question as to how Mr. Pellicano might have gotten advance copies of certain magazine articles. "Did you provide Mr. Pellicano with confidential information from Conde Nast pre-publication of that information?" Mr. Pellicano asked. "No, that never happened," Mr. Reynolds replied.