My point in asking whether JetBlue released the data to the Army or the company is that if the Army touched it or provided it as government furnished data to the company then Jetblue is pretty much in the clear.
From reading the Wired article from last friday Torch was called a subcontractor to another company that has a contract with the Army missile defense people. Under U.S. federal government contract law (which is very different from the commercial code) subcontractor has a very special meaning. If Torch is indeed a subcontractor then the provisions of the prime contract should flow down to their contract and the Army has a degree of control and visability and responsibility for what they are doing (if they are paying attention). CONVERSELY, if Torch is a vendor to the prime contractor the prime contract provisions do not flow down and the Army has no privity of contract with Torch and nothing to do with the direct management of the contract. In this case if the Army has no privity of contract neither Torch or Jetblue have the big Army green deep pockets involved. And if that is true then whoever was getting Jetblue to release the data was telling at least some little white fibs if not downright lying through their teeth and Torch and Jetblue will hang for it. Maybe.