Posted on 02/18/2010 11:47:18 AM PST by freespirited
We peeped for the children.
The schools here give out laptops and netbooks
It probably won't fly; it's a felony in PA.
Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, a person is guilty of a felony of the third degree if he:
(1) intentionally intercepts, endeavors to intercept, or procures any other person to intercept or endeavor to intercept any wire, electronic or oral communication;
(2) intentionally discloses or endeavors to disclose to any other person the contents of any wire, electronic or oral communication, or evidence derived therefrom, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through the interception of a wire, electronic or oral communication; or
(3) intentionally uses or endeavors to use the contents of any wire, electronic or oral communication, or evidence derived therefrom, knowing or having reason to know, that the information was obtained through the interception of a wire, electronic or oral communication.
Yikes, but does it include parents observing/monitoring their children?
I don't know, but that's for judge and jury to decide.
In the meantime, the proper approach is for felony complaints to be filed against all the parties responsible, warrants to be issued, arrests to be made, and on and on.
Those cruds are most likely to be great supporters of “zero tolerance” rules in their schools; this is a great case for “zero tolerance” to be exercised to the maximum.
Agreed.
“Let them buy their own laptops and give the money back to the taxpayers who earned it - PROBLEM SOLVED”
Thats the first problem. That doesn’t remove the unbelievable actions of this school.
Well, the school never told anyone that this surveillance software was in the computer and that the webcams could be remotely accessed.
Why put it there? To what purpose? Why not tell people up front that its there and that it’s not safe?
The deception from the start makes every other claim they make ring hollow.
Whoever thought this up, along with the administrators who PERMITTED it should all serve long jail terms.
This is sick, this is illegal, people need to be swiftly punished.
A reasonable sounding explanation, to be sure.
However, the potential for abuse does not warrant it.
This lawsuit is going to cost them more than replacing the computer would.
Couldn’t they have put a tracking chip in it? Those sorts of things exist already.
Not at all.
Yes, I saw all that, but if you read carefully, there is no claim that the asssistant principal ever said school district ever used the capability to secretly take remote web cam shots.
IMO, the wording seems to be intentionally deceptive, trying to give the impression that the principal said it had been used, when in fact she did not.
My guess is they asked her if remote photos could be taken and she said something like, “Well, in theory I suppose it could be done, but we have never even considered the idea.”
I’m sure we will find out the truth eventually, as I doubt the district could cover up the illegal surveilance if it really happened.
In reading it a second time, it's true that the statement doesn't actually say the photograph "cited as evidence" was taken without the student's knowledge. It only says the photo is "from the webcam embedded in" the student's laptop. That's an interesting point from Above My Pay Grade.
So, I guess we don't really know who took that particular photo... On the one hand, the complaint seems to imply that the school took it without the student's knowledge.
OTOH, the school's response seems purposely vague, too: LMSD Response They don't directly deny taking a picture of the student without his knowledge. So, maybe they did. Maybe their argument will be that they believed his laptop was lost or stolen. ;-)
Whatever the case, the school openly admits the webcam could be remotely activated to photograph someone using it without the user's knowledge. And now we know what argument the school plans to use: that it was a "security feature" used for lost/stolen laptops.
The mystery continues to unfold...
What I was saying was deceptive was that the school didn’t alert the students or the parents of the computer’s webcam’s full capabilities.
Those receiving the computers ought to have been told that the webcams could be activated from a remote location and could be used to see what was going on anywhere at any time. It’s a horrendous invasion of privacy and people ought to know that it’s been compromised.
Sure, the reason they gave for the software was for lost or stolen computers, but that presumes that all people are honest and trustworthy and would never do anything of questionable nature. What were the safeguards put in place to make sure that capability was not misused? For that matter, the school district came forward about the kid, but I don’t recall reading anything about them saying that someone misused the computer capabilities and that that person/ people are being disciplined and that efforts are being made to ensure that it doesn’t happen again.
One still has to wonder about the circumstances under which the school got hold of the photo of the student involved in the *improper* behavior.
If the kid sent it out, stupid of the kid, but I could see them coming forward with it. Otherwise, something is rotten in Denmark.
There’s a lot the school district didn’t say. They didn’t deny that they were spying on the kid. They could have simply said that he broadcast the image, which if he had, would have cleared them. They didn’t.
Their lack of being forthright from the beginning doesn’t reflect well on them and really cuts into their credibility concerning their part in this scenario.
Interesting google results on the topic.
Lower Merion School District sued for cyber spying on students
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/homepage/84715297.html?cmpid=15585797
“The family first learned of the embedded webcams on Nov. 11, when Harriton High’s Assistant Principal Lindy Matsko reprimanded Blake Robbins for “improper behavior in his home,” according to the lawsuit. Matsko cited as evidence a photograph from the webcam on the boy’s school-issued laptop.”
ping to post 58.
You know, it says that the V-P reprimanded the STUDENT for improper behavior at home and provided the photo from the webcam as evidence.
It doesn’t say that someone from the school inadvertently ran across the picture and went to the parents with their concern, such as, *Were you aware of what your son was broadcasting over the internet?*
The school is not denying an awful lot. They’re excusing it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.