School Dists in Pa be pervn
 

http://www.pcworld.com/article/19446..._students.html
Watching the high school students at home via their computers' cameras was like "a little [Lower Merion School District] soap opera," a staffer said in an e-mail to Cafiero obtained by Robbins' lawyer during discovery.

"I know, I love it!" Cafiero said in a reply, the motion asserted.

It's not "If" these kids are going to win a lawsuit, the only question is how many zeros will be on the end of that check.

cha ching

Lock them up for child porn.

But first post it up if any of the chicks are hot jailbait.

I think it was mostly boys; at least, that's what has been talked about in the articles most. That kid is going to be pretty wealthy though. This whole case makes me sick. How could administrators not know something like this could/would happen given the ability to remotely enable and log high school kid's laptops.

That is seriously stupidity on the part of the school. They deserve whatever they get, and that teacher is gonna burn.

The teacher wanted to see that boy fap.

yea she did

There is only one family suing the school, and believe or not most people in the school have been trying to convince the family to drop the law suit since it going to cost the school more money than they really have have, i.e. higher taxes for everyone to cover the costs.

The Feds are now involved in this so it getting really messy really fast. Obviously people will loose their jobs over this and they should also be the ones to pay the for the law suite since it was their decision to do what they did....

But can you blame then when the our President and Government Officials have said it okay to listen in and read your personal information without a court order.

This is not the only school doing this or company that is for sure, the company who makes this software is not just selling it to this school.

I don't think this is a valid line of thinking. What security risk did these individuals enrolled in the PUBLIC SCHOOL system pose - THAT WOULD REQUIRE IMAGES to substantiate no less?

Someone better start a PR campaign if thats the line of defense they are planning - bc it won't fly otherwise.

:rolleyes:

I did not say it was valid reason, but this is how people think these days, if it is okay for the government to spy on you and step all over your privacy rights why can they.

It is happening all over the place, companies are doing it as well as private citizens.

In this case they are using the camera and logging system to "tract a lost or stolen computer" but in reality they can monitor what the person is doing with the computer. Since the kid and families took it free of charge they feel you give any right to privacy up and they can capture and use that information anyway they like.

Also, for all of you who use gmail and the such and do not pay, you given up any right to privacy, they search and keep your emails looking for key words so they can target marking to you directly.

So every day people take free things without realizing what rights they just gave up and whether you really want them to know what you are doing.

This is the main reason I have software called Little Snitch on my Mac. It tells me if any program is trying communication externally and if any attempts to connect my computer.

Little snitch is probably snitching on you

Most of these things (certainly in the form of private businesses) do have legal disclaimers/fine print that provide this access. I seriously doubt that existed in these cases. If they did have a stipulation that allows for remote access in the investigation of lost hardware, they generally have very restrictive conditions when it can be applied. They have to have a case logged with the local PD on a stolen machine probably. They can't just say yep, we think one is missing so we are checking. That is kind of a BS rational for webcams anyway. They won't likely find out ANYTHING from an image. That is why they make lojack for laptops. That is the tool that would be deployed. A good (or even shabby) lawyer will cut this to ribbons pretty quick if they use that rationale.

I will acknowledge that people don't read enough of these details. But those quickly get dispensed with. Believe me - I am in IT security and they don't fly very far when someone crys lawsuit - Even the ACLU wont touch those.


Im like hmm.. unknown to me..

http://www.google.com/search?q=fap&i...ient=firefox-a

Go down the list - nope - nope - AH I see (bad pun)

Actually in this case that is part of the issue, no one but the school knew about this software, it was not disclosed to the parents or kids. You can bet the company who came up with this software advised the school to never let anyone know about it since if you know it exist then you can stop it from doing what it is intended to do which is to spy on you. The other issue is the school had no procedure or policy on how and when it can be used and this is probably the point that will get them in trouble.

The only issue I see is there is already case law on the fact that students have no expectation of privacy as student, the school at any time can search you, your possessions, your car and your locker once on school property. They do not need any probable cause or search warrant. Arguable the computer is school property and therefore they have every right to search it.

School have gone as far as suspending kids for things they have done outside the school like drinking and statement they made on face book.

For this reason I have told me kids no facebook accounts or similar, and it was not no your not allow, it was no this is not a good idea because look what can happen. I also told them if they go somewhere and people are doing dumb kid kinds of things and someone pulls out a camera, get out of there.

I have done my fair share of stupid kids things but all I can say there is no record of it except in the mind of those who were there, so it never happen.

I am pretty sure it is an onomatopoeia... but what do I know.