How Far does Your Right To Privacy Reach?

Two big stories in the news today (Monday) pertaining to privacy rights.

First is the story of the PA school district which used the built in web cams on school provided laptops to spy on students (and, subsequently, anyone the students chatted with on the computer).
Reference: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100420/...ng_on_students

The district collected more than 56k pictures from the web cams - not always taken from computers reported as stolen.

The next story in the new today (okay, on Monday) related to the Supreme Court hearing a case of a public employees right to privacy on their "company" provided equipment (specifically for monitoring texting).
In some cases, mobile phones are used to track the location of employees and the time they spend at any particular location (this is used a lot for plow operators).
Reference: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...-privacy-case/



So, my opinions:
In the first case, I feel that the school violated the rights to an expectation of privacy, vilated wiretapping laws, etc. with their activating the laptops cameras. This also had the potential for viewing the children in what should be considered pornographic circumstances (preparing for bed?). If the school was that concered about the equipment, they should never allow it off of school grounds.

In the second case, if the employer provides the equipment and pays for the service to make the equipment usable (network infrastructure, cellular service, etc.), whether it be a computer, desk phone, mobile phone, or anything else, the employee should be notified that use of the equipment implies their concent to monitoring and the employer had every right to monitor the employee and the employees actions - whether during work hours or off.

Just my opinions. Discuss?!

That web cam thing is insane. I'm too tired to comment now though.

I know how you felt there Stuart.

I abbreviated my post because I was so wiped out. I'm sure that you all appreciate that - given as how I tend to be long winded.

i think both are ridiculous.

the school thing is morally abhorrent. Spying on children in their bedrooms? Prying your way into other families homes?

Disgusting.

I agree the spying, and that is what it is, is wrong.

With all the electronics we are in the "Big Brother" era, just a little bit later than predicted in the book 1984.

Orwellian... That's the word I think is appropriate...

First, the school has NO DAMN BUSINESS monitoring children via web cam whether it is a school owned computer or not. The constitution is not suspended at the schoolhouse doors, or in this case, when they open the lap top. If they want to monitor, GET A DAMN WARRANT!

Too many watchdogs in every aspect of our lives nowadays. While technology is great in some ways I hate the constant monitoring that has been enabled by it.
I'll even go so far as to say I hate cell phones. [Rant2]

the school thing is absurd, and absolutely wrong. the school has no right to videotape kids, especially when they are going to be used in their bedrooms etc.
as for work issued devices, if it is a cell phone that is issued to the employee, I have some problem with the company on that one. they can do as they please during work hours, but if the company is going to monitor private text messages while the employee is off duty I have an issue with that. if they want to track someone using GPS, put a locator in the truck. for the plow operators the company could argue they want to make sure their employees are safe and don't get stranded in crappy conditions. I can't add much else...too tired right now and I will just ramble.

In the second case, I suppose if all parties involved acknowledge and are aware that company owned equipment is only to be used for work related purposes monitoring that usage is not too out of line. I really don't like my boss being able to track my location via GPS. One company I worked for did this frequently so guys would simply leave their Nextel stashed in a tool box at the job site when they left for lunch. That way, a guy didn't have to hear so much bitching if he took a few extra minutes at lunch.

GreenScout-I wish I'd thought of that on my last day and strapped the phone to a stray dog !! [Twist]

I would have found a migratory bird myself...[Muaha]

Mail the phone to a prison. The guards will open the box and confiscate it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marlin

I would have found a migratory bird myself...[Muaha]

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuart

Mail the phone to a prison. The guards will open the box and confiscate it.

---

Diabolical minds-I like it !! [Beer]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by theGinsue

Two big stories in the news today (Monday) pertaining to privacy rights.

First is the story of the PA school district which used the built in web cams on school provided laptops to spy on students (and, subsequently, anyone the students chatted with on the computer).
Reference: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100420/...ng_on_students

The district collected more than 56k pictures from the web cams - not always taken from computers reported as stolen.

The next story in the new today (okay, on Monday) related to the Supreme Court hearing a case of a public employees right to privacy on their "company" provided equipment (specifically for monitoring texting).
In some cases, mobile phones are used to track the location of employees and the time they spend at any particular location (this is used a lot for plow operators).
Reference: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...-privacy-case/



So, my opinions:
In the first case, I feel that the school violated the rights to an expectation of privacy, vilated wiretapping laws, etc. with their activating the laptops cameras. This also had the potential for viewing the children in what should be considered pornographic circumstances (preparing for bed?). If the school was that concered about the equipment, they should never allow it off of school grounds.

In the second case, if the employer provides the equipment and pays for the service to make the equipment usable (network infrastructure, cellular service, etc.), whether it be a computer, desk phone, mobile phone, or anything else, the employee should be notified that use of the equipment implies their concent to monitoring and the employer had every right to monitor the employee and the employees actions - whether during work hours or off.

Just my opinions. Discuss?!

---

First story - the school has absolutely no right to monitor students at home, even if on school provided equipment. There has to be a line of demarcation.

Second story - if the employer wants to monitor the employee's use of company provided equipment(vehicles, computers, etc) they can. If the employee doesn't like it the employee can seek employment elsewhere.

Caveat, if the employer feels the need to use the GPS function in a hand held device to monitor the employee than maybe the employer should re-evaluate their hiring process so they get more trustworthy employees. My train of thought on this is that a couple of jerks abused a flexible lunch policy and now everyone has to suffer - instead of the company firing the jerks.

Everyone knows that the only thing the "Right to Privacy" guarantees is your right to kill your unborn children (that's the rational Roe v. Wade is based on).

Other than that forget it.

With the volatile climate in the systems in our day and age, I can really see this leading somewhere. Something along the lines of a school gets sued for privacy concerns because the school caught the kid via webcam smoking some pot in his/her room. In court the schools attorney plays the card that, "x company uses this technology to moniter their employees and as a concerned society, we are simply keeping track of our kids to enable them to live safer lives." ... With the pussy liberal judges we have, that could set a precendent for some bad stuff... Thoughts?

I'm pretty sure that nearly every state has laws about recording people, especially in their homes. I know that in order to voice record someone, at least one person in the conversation must be aware of the recorder. In the webcam case, there is no conversation going on and the kid doesn't know the webcam is activated. Sounds illegal to me. I'm not even sure what I would do if I found out the school had done that to my kids.