"Spying" school agrees to preserve evidence in Laptopgate

[Niels Bohr 72]

By Jacqui Cheng | Last updated February 24, 2010 6:29 AM

The school district responsible for allegedly "spying" on a high school student in his own home has agreed not to remove webcam images from any of the 2,300 student-issued MacBooks. In the meantime, both the ACLU and EFF have spoken out about the incident that has gotten privacy advocates up in arms, and a number of parents have begun weighing in on the controversy that may, in the end, be all thanks to a bunch of mistaken candies.

The Lower Merion School District (LMSD) was issued an order by the Philadelphia Federal court on Monday barring the district from removing any possible evidence from laptops issued to students. Additionally, the court ordered LMSD to stop using the webcams to spy on students—something the district independently decided to do last Friday. The school agreed to both terms without an injunction, which the attorney representing high school student Blake Robbins applauded.

"I think the school district admits in its own press releases that it was wrong, it shouldn't have been doing this, certainly without some notice, consent, informed consent of the parents that this was something that could be done," attorney Mark Haltzman told KYW News Radio.

On top of the court order, the ACLU in Pennsylvania filed a "friend of the court" amicus brief (PDF) in support of Robbins' lawsuit. "No government official, be it police officer or school principal, can enter a private home, physically or electronically, without an invitation or warrant," ACLU legal director Vic Walczak said in a statement. "Assuming the allegations are true, this is an egregious invasion of privacy." The Electronic Frontier Foundation agreed, telling Laptop Magazine that LMSD's actions were violations of Robbins' fourth amendment rights.

All this comes just a day after news got out that the FBI had begun investigating the case for violations of the federal wiretapping law. The school district also claimed at that time that the built-in webcams were never used to spy on students in the 42 times they had been activated, and the students themselves seem conflicted over whether they had actually been spied on in the past. This was all topped off by a video of Haltzman telling NBC Philadelphia that the photo that started all this hubbub was of Robbins eating Mike & Ike candies, which school officials allegedly mistook for pills.

In the meantime, there are some pretty vicious rumors going around about Robbins' extracurricular activities that could have gotten him in hot water with administrators, but Haltzman unequivocally denies that his particular laptop was stolen—an event that would have triggered a webcam check from the school's IT department. Additionally, a number of parents whose kids go to LMSD have created a Facebook group to discuss the issues (many of which do not support the privacy argument at all as long as their kids get a good education, it seems). Needless to say, this situation just keeps getting thicker and more bizarre, and we'll continue to watch how it plays out in the courts.

[luckytxn 2,265]

If these kids were doing nothing wrong and are law abiding citizens then they should not be worried if they get looked in on from time to time.

[TBoneTX 46,276]

If these kids were doing nothing wrong and are law abiding citizens then they should not be worried if they get looked in on from time to time.

They, and everyone else in the U.S., should be worried. The Fourth Amendment is on life support, with the funeral to be held after any given one or two more Supreme Court decisions.

[Ali G. 37]

The laptops where government property, not their property. If I loan someone my computer, I have every right to know what they are doing with my property. Had this been their private laptops, then obviously this would be a different matter.

Interesting that these were Macs, so I'm keen on seeing the Mac fans defend this one. Never heard of this happening on a windows machine. I'll take the odd virus versus being spied on any day.

Edited February 24, 2010 by Booyah

[The_Dude 1,142]

The laptops where government property, not their property. If I loan someone my computer, I have every right to know what they are doing with my property. Had this been their private laptops, then obviously this would be a different matter.

Interesting that these were Macs, so I'm keen on seeing the Mac fans defend this one. Never heard of this happening on a windows machine. I'll take the odd virus versus being spied on any day.

They DO NOT have a right to spy on the students, regardless of whose owns it. Had they been told that they would be issued this computer with the caveat that they could be spied upon, using the embedded webcam, i wager that most would have declined it. I think have the ability to scan the computer for illegal usage is reasonable. Activating a webcam to spy on the kids is an invasion of privacy.

[Niels Bohr 72]

Hmmm....

Here's a different analogy that could shed into some meaning.

You let a friend borrow your jacket, do you want to supervise him on your jacket. Or, you let your mother use your car to get some groceries, do you want her to be supervised at all times.

There are situations which is quite reasonable for supervision. But, if the computer is idle, there's no need to spy on kids. Heck, suppose if the kids is undressing in their rooms (not using the computer) there's no need to turn on the webcam. Heck, put porn filters on the computer if you're scared they'll use it for porn.

If the computer get stolen, what can you do about it? How will you ever get it back?

This whole situation breaks so many ethical habbits of the school. Someone will get fired for sure or more than one person will. I will keep track.

Edited February 24, 2010 by Niels Bohr

[Ali G. 37]

They DO NOT have a right to spy on the students, regardless of whose owns it. Had they been told that they would be issued this computer with the caveat that they could be spied upon, using the embedded webcam, i wager that most would have declined it. I think have the ability to scan the computer for illegal usage is reasonable. Activating a webcam to spy on the kids is an invasion of privacy.

Okay, I will loan you a laptop and then I would like to see you sue me for doing the same. Preferably using a reputable legal system, like a European court.

Edited February 24, 2010 by Booyah

[The_Dude 1,142]

Sorry BY, despite your allusions, The U.S. Supreme Court is a legitimate legal court. Last I read, this story is in the U.S. and subject to applicable laws. I'm not going to compare apples to oranges here.

[SMR 368]

Had the school simply installed software to be able to view the PC screen, that would have perhaps been reasonable. What do they gain from using the webcam. You can't tell what someone is doing on a laptop with the webcam. You can only see the person. The person doesn't look much different whether they are typing an assignment or surfing the web.

[Ali G. 37]

Sorry BY, despite your allusions, The U.S. Supreme Court is a legitimate legal court. Last I read, this story is in the U.S. and subject to applicable laws. I'm not going to compare apples to oranges here.

It is? Could have fooled the rest of us from developed countries. I am sure Iran and Venezuela's legal system is legitimate in their eyes too.

Time to accept that your ALCU or their equivalents would be thrown out of any other first world courtroom. After all, who made them commander and chief of the country? Furthermore, there would be zero chance of some ACLU suing anything for millions, when they have not suffered financially in any way themselves. If you guys weren't so ethnocentric, you'd wake up and realize what the rest of the first world thinks of the legal system here. Furthermore, it's use to promote a particular groups agenda (ideology) and ultimately used to affect and influence policy impacting the people. It's basically the butt of jokes and after living here for over four years, seeing idiotic case after idiotic case, I see why.

Edited February 24, 2010 by Booyah

[SMR 368]

It is? Could have fooled the rest of us from developed countries. I am sure Iran and Venezuela's legal system is legitimate in their eyes too.

Time to accept that your ALCU or their equivalents would be thrown out of any other first world courtroom. After all, who made them commander and chief of the country? Furthermore, there would be zero chance of some ACLU suing anything for millions, when they have not suffered financially in any way themselves. If you guys weren't so ethnocentric, you'd wake up and realize what the rest of the first world thinks of the legal system here. Furthermore, it's use to promote a particular groups agenda (ideology) and ultimately used to affect and influence policy impacting the people. It's basically the butt of jokes and after living here for over four years, seeing idiotic case after idiotic case, I see why.

I can't speak as to the validity of courts in Australia, but the American legal system is definitely a joke.

[Ali G. 37]

I can't speak as to the validity of courts in Australia, but the American legal system is definitely a joke.

You can't sue for spilled coffee or $54 million for lost pants, that's for sure.

Any lawyer proposing such idiocy would probably be disbarred for wasting the commonwealths time. Whereas, lawyers over here salivate at the thought of suing for such nonsense. It's why we all need to be treated like morons here, with warnings on everything.

[The_Dude 1,142]

It is? Could have fooled the rest of us from developed countries. I am sure Iran and Venezuela's legal system is legitimate in their eyes too.

Time to accept that your ALCU or their equivalents would be thrown out of any other first world courtroom. After all, who made them commander and chief of the country? Furthermore, there would be zero chance of some ACLU suing anything for millions, when they have not suffered financially in any way themselves. If you guys weren't so ethnocentric, you'd wake up and realize what the rest of the first world thinks of the legal system here. Furthermore, it's use to promote a particular groups agenda (ideology) and ultimately used to affect and influence policy impacting the people. It's basically the butt of jokes and after living here for over four years, seeing idiotic case after idiotic case, I see why.

What other countries think, or what you think of this legal system is immaterial. It seems your grasp of the american judicial system is callow. I will agree that people suing for things like spilling coffee and getting millions of dollars is insane. People shouldnt' be able to sue for massive amounts when there is no financial loss, however, some offenses are so malicious that there needs to be punitive measures taken. In such a highly capitalistic society, monetary loss is the only thing that corporations understand and will react to. Things like breach of privacy and civil rights are paramount to this country. Your interpretation of personal freedoms may differ from that of this country, but that means absolutely nothing. Your entire premise is that this wouldn't happen in Australia. So what? This isn't Australia, so nobody gives a **.

[Ali G. 37]

What other countries think, or what you think of this legal system is immaterial. It seems your grasp of the american judicial system is callow. I will agree that people suing for things like spilling coffee and getting millions of dollars is insane. People shouldnt' be able to sue for massive amounts when there is no financial loss, however, some offenses are so malicious that there needs to be punitive measures taken. In such a highly capitalistic society, monetary loss is the only thing that corporations understand and will react to. Things like breach of privacy and civil rights are paramount to this country. Your interpretation of personal freedoms may differ from that of this country, but that means absolutely nothing. Your entire premise is that this wouldn't happen in Australia. So what? This isn't Australia, so nobody gives a **.

So which country would you be able to pass a similar lawsuit in?

This isn't Australia, so nobody gives a **.

You really got me with that logical and educated response. Yeah that must be why so many from first world countries migrate there. By the way, it's the contrary actually. Go to Europe or Asia and say I am a Yank from LA and gauge their response.

Edited February 24, 2010 by Booyah

[The_Dude 1,142]

So which country would you be able to pass a similar lawsuit in?

You really got me with that logical and educated response. Yeah that must be why so many from first world countries migrate there. By the way, it's the contrary actually. Go to Europe or Asia and say I am a Yank from LA and gauge their response.

BY, you're the retarded one in this thread. You fail to address the topic at hand. You going to post an educated response that address the subject matter or continue to spout off your usual #######? The fact of the matter is, this case is in the U.S., not australia, so all your little insults and anecdotes about australia and europe mean nothing.

I never said anything about being able to pass off any lawsuit like this in another country. I'm not so delusional that I would try to transpose another country's legal system onto the problems of the U.S.. That is just imbecilic, but you continue on with that line of reasoning BY as it seems to make you feel better about yourself.