PA School Spied On Students Via School-Issued Laptop Webcams 941
jargon82 writes "A Pennsylvania high school is using laptops they issued to students to spy on them in homes and outside of school. According to a class action filling the webcams and microphones in these laptops could be remotely activated by school officials, and have been used in this role. One student was accused of 'improper behavior in his home' and the school provided a photo taken via his laptop as proof."
Hmm (Score:5, Interesting)
at the very least (Score:4, Interesting)
convict them - then home monitor THEM! (Score:4, Interesting)
Idiots!
Re:Hmm (Score:3, Interesting)
I think they'd have to record it for it to be child pornography. Streaming would be sexual exploitation of a child and whatever the legal term for peeping-tom is.
But then I knew of some teachers in my high school who had no problem watching students have sex in a car in the school parking lot. Not via cameras; live viewing through a window overlooking the parking lot. (They just wouldn't let me have a look.)
Re:at the very least (Score:4, Interesting)
First of all, you cannot prove that. Secondly, they knew the software was there, making them guilty of TRYING to produce child pornography.
Seriously. If they "happen" to have pictures of some kid "behaving improperly", they will definitely have pictures/movies of everything else that kid has been doing.
That is exactly what everyone who had a hand in setting this up, or who KNEW that this had been set up, should be charged with ASAP. Conspiracy to create child pornography, because they set up a situation almost CERTAIN TO PRODUCE IT!
People certainly have been charged with child porn or similar charges for a lot less, including activity that didn't actually involve a minor (ie: a cop pretending to be one). These monsters were ACTUALLY RECORDING VIDEO AND AUDIO OF CHILDREN WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT!
Bad method of correction (Score:4, Interesting)
Beautiful job by the lawyers in this case. They're the only winners. It is a class action where all students in the district are members of the class. Seeking liquidated damages, punitive damages, and attorney fees. Assuming they "win", then these same families will be able to vote themselves a new tax levy to pay for the damages awarded, plus the attorney fees of both sides.
On the face of it, the school screwed up royally. No doubt about it. But did anyone even try to work this out via another method? Did the school board know about this? Since they are probably parents in the district, my guess is that they did not know.
I think the board should fire the administration for cause. If they have to pay some lawyers to make that stick, so be it. It would still be less expensive than this class action.
Re:Why am I not surprised. (Score:5, Interesting)
Occams Razor will serve you well (Score:4, Interesting)
I got $100 that says the next few days will see some "clarification" of this story that will make it seem significantly less reprehensible.
My bet is the kid used the webcam to take some photos that then ended up back at school.
Re:Why boingboing? (Score:5, Interesting)
I suspect it's because BoingBoing scooped everyone else on this one yesterday. There were blogs for pennsylvania city papers (like http://citypaper.net/blogs/clog/tag/big-brother/) that were citing BoingBoing as the source. BoingBoing didn't link to a news article, they linked to the court documentation. If you look at all of those links from Google, none of them have a timestamp earlier than the BoingBoing post either. I suspect this wasn't on the paper's radars until BB posted it in the first place.
Re:Why boingboing? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Tape (Score:3, Interesting)
I had a hole in a heater hose, and duct taped it until the auto parts stores opened, and never got around to replacing the hose. Whe I got rid of the car three years later, the hose still didn't leak.
I'd say it fixed THAT problem.
Re:WTF?! (Score:2, Interesting)
You're right on the money with this one. Outside of school grounds, there is absolutely no reason that anyone at the school has any business to question what goes on with my kids. At best, they can maybe have some rules about Internet usage if it's a laptop which the school owns.
Let's face it- for the most part, the kids aren't going to be using these laptops in the kitchen or in the family room- they're going to be using them in their BEDROOM. I'm sorry, but I don't even go into my kids' bedrooms without knocking first. What gives some useless administrator from the school the right to go into any kids bedroom? Whoever came up with this plan has to be missing something in the intelligence area. And can you imagine what effect this will have on the kids when they turn around to find that little light on that indicates the webcam is active? All I can say is there's going to be a lot of therapy for kids who feel victimized if this is actually allowed to go forward.
If I was the parent of one of the kids that got a "school laptop" and found out that this was part of the usage policy, I'd be delivering it back to the school along with a letter from my lawyer.
Life Imitates Art (Score:3, Interesting)
Cory Doctorow's novel, "Little Brother" predicted exactly this happening in schools, where the school-issued laptops were used to monitor student behavior, websurfing, etc. etc.
I didn't think it would actually happen this soon, however.
Re:Tape (Score:3, Interesting)
Honestly, I hope that they get a lot more than that, that any elected officials who were aware of the situation and didn't work to prevent it are impeached and convicted (and given serious prison time as well as any government benefits including pensions revoked), and the school administration officials receive the same - and the district be blocked from "making up" for the "losses" through taxes. Tax increases should be outlawed in that district and if it means the schools must declare bankruptcy, it should be chalked up as a learning experience.
This is a serious constitutional issue. It is a violation of the fourth amendment rights, at minimum, not to mention violation of video surveillance laws (i.e., reasonable expectation of privacy - this is why lavatories, changing rooms, etc. do not have video surveillance in place) and wiretapping laws. This is a serious, serious issues and the fucks behind this hare-brained idea need to be made an example of. I'd be all for tar and feathering them, but then, I'm a proponent of wild west-style frontier law since it works. Sadly, today that kind of thing is politically incorrect and is considered "cruel and unusual punishment."
However, if this is overlooked, the district pays out some money to the families affected, and is allowed to increase taxes to make up for any shortfalls, it will appear as a "win" on the side of fascism, where "patriot act" style spying/monitoring activities are deemed worth the cost of doing business, just as Microsoft looks at a few million dollar "antitrust" fine to be the cost of doing business. There need to be dire consequences for knowingly and willingly violating constitutional rights of citizens regardless of the level of government someone resides in, from the President at the top all the way down to the lowliest of low janitors at public schools, street cops, receptionists at colleges, and everyone in between. The Constitution is not in place to "grant" the people rights, the Constitution is in place to limit what the government is allowed to do . Sadly, this has long since been forgotten, and the very fact that we are a Constitutional Republic and not a Democracy has long since been forgotten as well, and it's to our own pain as the difference is key to our system of checks and balances.
But, apathy will reign here. There is some sign of the people awaking from the slumber with the election of Scott Brown in Massachusetts (did you think you would ever see this uber-liberal state vote for a real conservative?!) but let's hope that it's a sweeping change across the nation. I for one am sick to death of both moonbat liberals and neo-con Republicans - who claim to have different platforms, but really, both extremes are so far apart from what their party platforms used to stand for that the end result shows that they are simply the same horse painted different colors. What we need is more centrist, true conservatives, and what I mean by that is people who understand that words mean things, and the Constitution in this country really is the supreme law of the land, and needs to be followed rather than paid lip service.
Re:Tape (Score:2, Interesting)
Everybody gets raped in prision if they are in there enough time.
I wish we already dropped the cliche so that somebody would worry about that. Jails in japan, germany or spain are much better places of actual rehabilitation. The american way of jailing people is really third world rate.
Re:Why am I not surprised. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Tape (Score:3, Interesting)
vice principle should be fired for stupidity (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Who set it up? (Score:3, Interesting)
I'd like to ask these people why they never saw fit to let anyone know what was happening? Did they think it was a good idea? Were they scared for their job or contract? Were they just so ecstatic at the idea of a digital girls locker room that they willingly participated?
Maybe I'm paranoid, but I wouldn't be surprised if it turns out that the entire plan was invented by the IT person, expressly FOR the purpose of generating child porn. It's an easy sell to the administrators, because they're all about crushing the life force of children, and on the back side he's making major profit selling naughty images.
Huh? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Hmm (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:at the very least (Score:4, Interesting)
What you quoted from the lawsuit isn't really much different than what I quoted from the AP article. The lawsuit does, as the AP stated, allege that the webcams captured these compromising images. As you quoted, it is "averred", meaning "it is asserted as a fact of the case". Of course they haven't proven it. That's for the trial. But they are certainly alleging that it happened.
As to whether or not anyone saw those images, that is immaterial. It is likely those images were created, and that is all that is necessary for a crime to have been committed. You'll notice that, in cases where child pornography is found on someone's computer, no one ever asks whether it was proven that the individual looked at the material. Simply having it, or creating it, is enough.
Waterfall (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:If you read the filing... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Tape (Score:5, Interesting)
If even a single 14 year was viewed naked in the privacy of their own home by a covert camera laws will have been broken.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/28/webcam_coersion_suspect/
A life sentence is what this guy faced.........
Be interesting to see how much of this is hype and how much really happened.
Re:Tape (Score:2, Interesting)
What's with you Americans and the perverse pleasure you take from the fact that your prisons are growing grounds for hardened criminals and rapists?
Re:Tape (Score:4, Interesting)
You can do both.
For instance, OJ was tried under criminal charges for murder. He was found not-guilty because jurors said they flat-out didn't understand the DNA evidence.
Later, OJ was taken to court for civil charges in which the victim's families were awarded monetary damages.
Re:Tape (Score:3, Interesting)
And what about those who voted or spoke against this? Should they be punished? Should you be held personally responsible for every dishonest thing someone you voted for does?
No. You vote them out of office, and levy criminal charges against the person who committed the crime.
Re:Waterfall (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Tape (Score:2, Interesting)
The american way of jailing people is really third world rate.
This shouldn't be too surprising, because America is a third-world country. As I once heard it said, "America is a third-world country that won the lottery." The main difference between the USA and Mexico is that the USA has a lot more money. There's some smart people in both places who aren't typical of the culture around them, but by and large, the USA, just like its poverty-sticken neighbor, is a third-world country. Notice for instance how professional wrestling is one of the most popular sports in both countries. The corruption in the government is also quite blatant in both countries. And both have very high levels of drug-related violence and crime.
Re:Tape (Score:3, Interesting)
Pile of Shit Control Freaks... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Tape (Score:1, Interesting)
Hence the distinction between "neo con" and a real conservative. Real conservatives do not want to use government to establish religion. Why should government be in the business of conducting the religious sacrament called "marriage" anyhow? It is an arrangement the government never should have gotten into in the first place.
Why the fuck should I care whether Johnathan wants to marry Cynthia or George? It's not my business what they will be doing in the bedroom, or whether their actions offends their "god." It is not up to you and me to legislate morality beyond laws which prevent my infringing on your freedoms, for example, I have the right to swing my arm, and my right to do so should not be infringed, but if I form a fist with my hand and use my hand to injure you, I have exceeded my right and infringed upon yours. That kind of legislated morality I think everyone should agree is something government should legislate. But, as far as who gets jiggy with whom, why should anyone else care? If two guys grosses you or me out, it's up to us to not watch them as they are humping one another. We in America do not have the right to not be offended.
Re:Hmm (Score:3, Interesting)
It isn't the first time a school has punished a kid for something that happens outside of school grounds and hours.
It also depends on what is considered "school grounds." When I was in school, about 5 years ago, our school district stated (I am not sure if this is district policy or that of state or local government) that school grounds is not just school land but also the buses and any area within a few hundred feet from any bus stop. This bus stop consideration can lead to some interesting side effects.
I remember an incident from back in middle school about a kid who liked to engage in horseplay with his little brother. Typical sibling rivalry stuff. They would occasionally have bruises or whatnot from their wrestling and carrying on. One day the little brother showed up to the bus stop with a black eye. He got it when they were playing tackle-football or something in their back yard after school. From what I was told, a teacher asked what had happened and went to the principal of the elementary school. This then went to the principal of the middle school and the kid was suspended for a two weeks for bullying. Because his bus stop was right in front of his house, they used the bus stop clause to designate his back yard as "school property".
Typically this rule is used to keep people from getting beat up or doing stupid stuff at the bus stop. In this case it was grossly misused. I'm assuming the parents contested, but the kid was out for two weeks anyway. Just as well, he was a real asshole and probably would have been suspended sooner or later for something else just as dumb.
Re:Why am I not surprised. (Score:4, Interesting)
If you had simply called in sick, you'd be fine.
The problem with this is then you have to coach your child to lie also, when he/she is asked about it upon return to school, thereby putting you squarely in bad parenting territory.
This would not be an interrogation, more along the lines of:
"I hope you are feeling better, little Janey"
"Feeling better? I was visiting my grandma"
"So you weren't sick at all, I see"
and viola, the lie backfires.
Most teachers will ask this out of genuine concern, not looking for a lie at all.
Re:Hmm (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Tape (Score:3, Interesting)
I personally would cover up any webcam or microphone built into a laptop given to me by school or work and just use external solutions.
Personally, I out of principle do not have a webcam - this laptop has none built in, and I don't connect an external one either. There is simply no need for anyone, authorized or not, to see anything here.
However it would require an advanced degree of tinhattedness on part of students to even be aware of the danger. IMO, a common student would have no reason whatsoever to tape the camera, especially if it has a legitimate use, such as with Skype, whether those uses are private or related to education.
In addition to that, the complaint mentions that other people, who have no reason whatsoever to even be aware of presence of the laptop in the room (let alone the camera in it) may consider the setting private, while in fact it is not.
Re:The ever growing list of reasons (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Tape (Score:2, Interesting)
this is the THIRD time this Member State has been caught abusing teenagers' rights. Twice before teens were thrown into jail (for one night) because boyfriends/girlfriends were sending naked images of their own bodies to one another (naked humans; oh noes!), and now here's the third time this Member State was caught abusing the rights of our teenaged citizens.
I think this Pennsylvania Government is getting out of control. The sad part is, because this school is part of the government, it will probably not be charged. Government tends not to charge its own people, or if it does, the charges are so lenient as to be effectively no punishment at all.
But if WE did something like this, we'd spend 7 years in jail and have to wear a Scarlet Letter (name on a child molester list) for the rest of our lives. There are two standards for normal citizens and government citizens.
Re:Hmm (Score:3, Interesting)
That's just the thing though, according to the lawsuit [craphound.com], the school district did not indicate that it would be monitoring students via the webcam.
Re:Waterfall (Score:3, Interesting)