Fornits
General Interest => Open Free for All => Topic started by: Anne Bonney on April 20, 2010, 01:56:59 PM
-
Pa. district took 56,000 images on student laptops
http://www.dailyfinance.com/article/pa- ... nt/912040/ (http://www.dailyfinance.com/article/pa-district-took-56000-images-on-student/912040/)
By MARYCLAIRE DALEAP posted: 8:33 AM 04/20/10
PHILADELPHIA -A suburban school district secretly captured at least 56,000 webcam photographs and screen shots from laptops issued to high school students, its lawyer acknowledged Monday.
"It's clear there were students who were likely captured in their homes," said lawyer Henry Hockeimer, who represents the Lower Merion School District.
None of the images, captured by a tracking program to find missing computers, appeared to be salacious or inappropriate, he said. The district said it remotely activated the tracking software to find 80 missing laptops in the past two years.
The Philadelphia Inquirer first reported Monday on the large number of images recovered from school servers by forensic computer experts, who were hired after student Blake Robbins filed suit over the tracking practice.
Robbins still doesn't know why the district deployed the software tracking program on his computer, as he had not reported it lost or stolen, his lawyer said.
The FBI has opened a criminal investigation into possible wiretap violations by the district, and U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter, of Pennsylvania, has introduced a bill to include webcam surveillance under the federal wiretap statute.
The district photographed Robbins 400 times during a 15-day period last fall, sometimes as he slept in bed or was half-dressed, according to his lawyer, Mark Haltzman. Other times, the district captured screen shots of instant messages or video chats the Harriton High School sophomore had with friends, he said.
"Not only was Blake Robbins being spied upon, but every one of the people he was IM chatting with were spied upon," said Haltzman, whose lawsuit alleges wiretap and privacy violations. "They captured pictures of people that have nothing to do with Harriton. It could be his cousin from Connecticut."
About 38,000 of the images were taken over several months from six computers the school said were stolen from a locker room.
The tracking program took images every 15 minutes, usually capturing the webcam photo of the user and a screen shot at the same time. The program was sometimes turned on for weeks or months at a time, Hockeimer said.
"There were no written policies or procedures governing the circumstances surrounding activating the program and the circumstances regarding turning off the activations," Hockeimer said.
Robbins was one of about 20 students who had not paid the $55 insurance fee required to take the laptops home but was the only one tracked, Haltzman said.
The depositions taken to date have provided contradictory testimony about the reasons for tracking Robbins' laptop. One of the two people authorized to activate the program, technology coordinator Carol Cafiero, invoked her Fifth Amendment right not to answer questions at the deposition, Haltzman said.
About 10 school officials had the right to request an activation, Hockeimer disclosed Monday.
The tracking program helped police identify a suspect not affiliated with the school in the locker room theft, Hockeimer said. The affluent Montgomery County district distributes the Macintosh notebook computers to all 2,300 students at its two high schools, Hockeimer said.
As part of the lawsuit, a federal judge this week is set to begin a confidential process of showing parents the images that were captured of their children.
The school district expects to release a written report on an internal investigation in the next few weeks, Hockeimer said. School board President David Ebby has pledged the report will contain "all the facts — good and bad."
Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
2010-04-20 08:33:14
-
Reposting news stories on a forum nobody reads? Get a fucking life, loser!
-
The Blake Robbins case happened while fornits was offline in February of this year. I thought for sure that it was mentioned on the fornits FB site, but I can't seem to find it just now...
This whole situation of the school district spying on students came to light when Blake Robbins got hauled into the principal's office and was accused of taking drugs. As "proof," the assistant principal showed him screen shots taken of him allegedly popping pills while working on his computer at home. Blake and his family maintain the "pills" were Mike 'n' Ikes candies.
From Philadelphia's City Paper's News, Opinion and Sports Blog ... The Clog (some great comments on this blog, btw):
-------------- • -------------- • --------------
Blake Robbins' crime? Popping Mike-N-Ike's, he says (http://http://citypaper.net/blogs/clog/2010/02/20/blake-robbins-crime-popping-mike-n-ikes-he-says/)
Saturday, February 20th, 2010 at 9:53 am
posted by Jeffrey Billman
categories Lower Merion Webcam-Gate, News, Tinfoil Hats Off
NBC 10 got an interview with the kid (http://http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/tech/WebcamGate-Teen-I-Hope-Theyre-Not-Watching-Me-84826357.html) (and his lawyer) at the center of the Lower Merion School District scandal. According to their story, we now know the supposed inappropriate behavior that the School District snapped a photo of, via Blake's Web cam: The district thought they caught him popping pills. Blake Robbins says they were Mike-N-Ike's candies.
The 16-year-old from Penn Valley, Pa. claims Matsko showed him photos remotely taken with the built-in webcam on his MacBook, according to the suit.
In the photos, the teen was allegedly holding two pill-shaped objects, says Robbins' attorney Mark Haltzman. School officials believed they were drugs, while the family maintains they were simply Mike-N-Ike candy.
"They were trying to allege that...those were pills and somehow he was involved in selling drugs," Halzman said Friday.[/list]
Of course, the district told us yesterday, in so many words, that Blake's computer had to have been reported stolen, or else they wouldn't have activated the security contraption on his MacBook. The AP has reported that district officials have said that only two tech department folks had the authority to activate that security feature, which, of course, raises the question: How the hell did a Harriton High assistant principal get her hands on a photo of Blake eating candy, or whatever? Also, as Holly reported yesterday (http://http://citypaper.net/blogs/clog/2010/02/19/breaking-lower-merion-school-district-admits-its-used-webcam-security-feature-before/), the district has done this before, though how often remains unclear. From the NBC story:
If the allegations of spying prove to be true, Blake may not be the only victim. Other students claim they've seen their webcam go live while off school grounds and worry they've been spied on too.
"Occasionally a green light would go on, on your computer which would kind of give you the feeling that somebody's watching you," Harriton High School student Drew Scheier told NBC Philadelphia Thursday.[/list]
The FBI is reportedly investigating (http://http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/tech/FBI-Launches-Criminal-Investigation-into-Webcam-Spying-Source-84805867.html), as is the Montgomery County District Attorney's Office; the Inky is reporting that federal prosecutors have issued subpoenas (http://http://www.philly.com/philly/news/homepage/20100220_Subpoena_issued_in_L__Merion_webcam_case.html). Buckle yourselves in, folks: this thing's gonna get a whole lot weirder before it's over.
Tags: blake robbins, lower merion school district
© Copyright 1995 – 2009 Philadelphia City Paper. All rights reserved.
-
Computerworld
Pennsylvania schools spying on students using laptop webcams, claims lawsuit (http://http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9158818/Pennsylvania_schools_spying_on_students_using_laptop_webcams_claims_lawsuit)
Class-action suit alleges schools remotely activate webcams on school-issued notebooks
By Gregg Keizer
February 18, 2010 02:40 PM ET
Computerworld - A suburban Philadelphia school district remotely activates the cameras in school-provided laptops to spy on students in their homes, a lawsuit filed in federal court Tuesday alleged.
According to the lawsuit filed by a high school student and his parents, the Lower Merion School District of Ardmore, Pa. has spied on students and families by "indiscriminate use of and ability to remotely activate the webcams incorporated into each laptop issued to students by the School District."
Approximately 1,800 students at the district's two high schools have been given laptops as part of a state- and federally-funded "one-to-one" student-to-laptop initiative.
Michael and Holly Robbins of Penn Valley, Pa., said they first found out about the alleged spying last November after their son Blake was accused by a Harriton High School official of "improper behavior in his home" and shown a photograph taken by his laptop.
An assistant principal at Harriton later confirmed that the district could remotely activate the webcam in students' laptops. "Michael Robbins thereafter verified, through [Assistant Principal] Ms. Matsko, that the school district in fact has the ability to remotely activate the webcam contained in a student's personal laptop computer issued by the school district at any time it chose and to view and capture whatever images were in front of the webcam, all without the knowledge, permission or authorization of any persons then and there using the laptop computer," the lawsuit stated.
The Robbins claimed that the district did not tell them beforehand that their son's laptop webcam could be activated remotely, and added that there was no mention of the functionality in any of the documentation they received or on the district's Web site.
And the privacy of non-students has been violated, the Robbins said. "By virtue of the fact that the webcam can be remotely activated at any time by the School District, the webcam will capture anything happening in the room in which the laptop computer is located, regardless of whether the student is sitting at the computer and using it," the lawsuit charged.
The suit accuses the school district of violating the federal Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), and other federal and state statues, including the Pennsylvania Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Act.
Mark Haltzman of the law firm Lamm Rubenstone, and the Robbins' attorney, did not return a call for comment. A spokesman for the Lower Merion School District said early Thursday that the district had only found out about the suit hours before, and so was not able to immediately comment on the case.
If the lawsuit is granted class-action status, other students in the district and their families would be able to join the action.
The Robbins family has asked for unspecified compensatory and punitive damages, and demanded that the court issue an injunction barring the district from activating students' laptop cameras.
Gregg Keizer covers Microsoft, security issues, Apple, Web browsers and general technology breaking news for Computerworld. Follow Gregg on Twitter at Twitter @gkeizer or subscribe to Gregg's RSS feed Keizer RSS. His e-mail address is gkeizer@ix.netcom.com.
Copyright © 1994 - 2010 Computerworld Inc.
-
A few students and parents directly affected by this case have seen fit to vent in some of the below comments...
-------------- • -------------- • --------------
Comments (http://http://www.computerworld.com/comments/node/9158818) left for the above article, "Pennsylvania schools spying on students using laptop webcams, claims lawsuit (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=22&p=385081#p385081)" (by Gregg Keizer; February 18, 2010; Computerworld), #s 1-20:
Privacy....
Submitted by School Network Manager on February 18, 2010 - 16:15.
Since I manage the computer systems and network in our district, I understand tracking the computer on the network and the need for filtering this traffic. But this is just beyond belief. My guess is student was surfing restricted sites or attempting to hack the school network. Maybe just maybe, they had programmed the computer to automatically take a photo when this happened (easily done and sometimes done inside the schools). But regardless, this was an ill advised plan on computers being sent home with the children. WOW JUST WOW.
computers and the school system
Submitted by Anonymous on February 22, 2010 - 14:43.
The question should have been asked by the parents why the students need web-cams prior to them being issued. I cannot think of one reason that a student with a school issued computer needs a web-cam. The school should have never incorporated that type of remote software into these computers. It is at the very least an invasion of privacy and at worst a sex crime because, if the computer was left on they could have observed someone else in the home that was not the student. There are other types of tracking software that do not allow the camera to be activated remotely and you can monitor the user. I think that everyone should be outraged over this because it reads right out of a Hollywood spy movie.
perhaps you are not aware
Submitted by Anonymous on February 25, 2010 - 12:59.
The students were not issued separate webcams with the laptops. Most laptops come with a webcam built in just above the screen. As for your sex crime comment, yes this could have resulted in a peeping-tom situation, but not because of the reason that you state, which is a nonsequitor. If a student has the laptop open and on in their room constantly then there is a risk of an image being captured while that student is in some state of undress.
How many kids would turn
Submitted by Anonymous on February 26, 2010 - 19:28.
How many kids would turn their computer off before dressing or undressing? Or, would they rather hurry to get dressed for bed and try to get a few more minutes of time on the computer? The later I think for most children. The schools have no right to remotely access camera functions in a private home. When they do, that home is no longer PRIVATE. I for one would not allow this laptop in my home. Also not mentioned before is the ability for the person monitoring the laptop to access files through the laptop over the network. I work in the IT industry with sensitive and personal materials. It would be a breach of contract for me to allow remote access. But, beyond that point, I wouldn't allow it in any case. The school has no right to monitor students in the home. That is the parents job. Including monitoring their computer use.
[/list][/list]
Have you ever paid attention to new computers?
Submitted by Anonymous on February 26, 2010 - 12:08.
im gonna take a random guess that you dont know much about technology, because most if not all laptops these days have a web cam built into the lid of the laptop, right above the screen
[/list]
This school's Board should
Submitted by Anonymous on April 20, 2010 - 13:36.
This school's Board should all be forced to resign, and then the administration, and every member of the staff and faculty involved, should be fired, stripped of retirement benefits, and sued. Then, those officials directly involved should be criminally investigated for breaking any applicable laws, especially those regarding child pornography, and prosecuted. If this is not done by the local law enforcement, then it should be investigated for corruption.
[/list]
webcam spying
Submitted by Anonymous on February 18, 2010 - 16:29.
Either big brother is watching or maybe some pervert principal or teacher thought of this. Either way it is disgusting and whomever thought of this needs to be fired and/or imprisoned.
Hah!
Submitted by Anonymous on February 18, 2010 - 18:52.
That happens only in america :P phedophiles.
I hear
Submitted by Anonymous on February 18, 2010 - 19:05.
I hear that the school district was able to avoid state cuts in funding by selling some of the videos it made of the students to internet porn sites.
[/list]
Really?
Submitted by Anonymous on February 19, 2010 - 11:09.
I didn't post it, but it is obvious that the internet porn site thing was a joke. The fact that you didn't get it and used the word "retarded" is pretty sad.
[/list][/list]
Yeah, because idiotic people
Submitted by Anonymous on February 19, 2010 - 08:28.
Yeah, because idiotic people only live in America. Seriously?[/list][/list][/list]
I went to this school and
Submitted by Anonymous on February 18, 2010 - 22:44.
I went to this school and graduated a few years ago. It makes me sick thinking and hearing about this. I can't believe this happened.
glad i graduated before they
Submitted by dubstepper on February 19, 2010 - 03:28.
glad i graduated before they handed those laptops out...haha
What's that noise coming
Submitted by Anonymous on February 19, 2010 - 14:20.
What's that noise coming from your mortarboard? Eh?
[/list]
Hurray!!! Somebody said it!!!
Submitted by Anonymous on February 26, 2010 - 19:31.
I strongly agree with you. If it was just at school, then fine. Though I wonder how many of the kids have taken the laptop to the bathroom or locker room and tried to send a quick message? If there is even remotely a possibility of this, than the cams should be removed, EVEN on school property.
[/list]
How do I get my school into
Submitted by Anonymous on February 18, 2010 - 16:38.
How do I get my school into that program?
One to One laptop to student WOW!!!
just a bunch of pedophiles,
Submitted by i torched my school on February 18, 2010 - 16:40.
just a bunch of pedophiles, and they deserve what is coming to them
hahahahaha
Et tu, Teacher?
Submitted by Realist on February 18, 2010 - 16:47.
While I will admit that the public school system is in serious need of improvement, how does turning education over to spies improve anything? Is there not already a lack of trust between school administrators, the students, and their parents? Do the administrators think they are not also subject to privacy laws and expectations just because they run the school? The only lesson being learned here is to take electrical tape and cover up the cameras on these laptops. Or just not ever turn them on, which defeats the purpose of having them in the first place.
Unbelievable!
Submitted by midabe on February 18, 2010 - 16:55.
What were they thinking?!?
Someone needs to go through the video, preferably the parents for the student in the video. I can't imagine if the student had their laptop open while they were in their room changing and someone from the school was watching. Criminal charges should be filed for this alone. Who in their right mind would do something like this?
Why would a school think that it has the right to cite/charge a student for their behavior at home. This is the responsibility of the parent, not the school. You go to school for an education, not to be policed 24/7.
This is not something someone just gets fired for. This is something that people go to prison for. The person who signed for this illegal surveillance should go to jail and anyone who initiated a connection to the webcam.
School District Should Implode
Submitted by Mike in Albuquerque on February 18, 2010 - 16:56.
IF this is in fact true I'd lay even money there will be an election where every board member is replaced if the school district financially survives the court award. Just imagine as this goes along and the attorneys request every picture taken from those laptops and what if familie members are doing legal private acts in the "privacy" of their home. What if any of those pictures are found on the web? The citizens of that district had better just settle now and throw out the entire leadership at the district offices and principals. Other schools beware - don't hire them. Where's the District Attorney on this? Where's the FBI on this? Hey everyone is your computer safe? Is there software installed you are unaware of that is watching you because some store geek put it on?
Copyright © 1994 - 2010 Computerworld Inc.
-
Comments (http://http://www.computerworld.com/comments/node/9158818) left for the above article, "Pennsylvania schools spying on students using laptop webcams, claims lawsuit (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=22&p=385081#p385081)" (by Gregg Keizer; February 18, 2010; Computerworld), #s 21-40:
Teachers spy on students
Submitted by Amy Magoo on February 18, 2010 - 17:04.
Pennsylvania is sooo backwards in many ways.
This is the latest in a string of abuses of young people there.
I was looking at real estate online there. It is just too 'dark' and unconscious - I am so glad I was reminded of that today.
How much you create suffering in your children is how you will suffer with crappy neighborhoods, and how you will suffer on your death bed- not to mention your next life. Take it from this hospice nurse. I have seen what people regret for over 20 years now.
Too bad there are so few inter-generational places to gather- like community centers and such. The old folks forgot their youth, so can't relate to youth today as real/equal/etc. Youth have no fun w/adults. Everyone is too busy. This is a bad cycle and it damages everything in it's wake.
I wonder if these students will begin spying on the teachers. Do as I say, not as I do- right?
Pa. schools spy on students using laptop webcams, claims lawsuit
Submitted by Tim Semakula on February 18, 2010 - 17:15.
This, on it's face, appears to be a gross violation of privacy rights. Normally I don't advocate this type of behavior but, someone should be fired over this. I don't know about compensation, which should evaluated a on case by case basis. This stinks of bad planning, failure to get legal advice from district counsel and poor over site by the legislature.
What was the administrator thinking?
Submitted by Dave McElroy on February 18, 2010 - 17:23.
Honestly, disregarding how much of an initial invasion of privacy this was, how did the school official think that he had ANY grounds to contact or report the student who had been commiting "improper behavior."
How could this idiot NOT have the foresight to realize he was invading privacy. Say, for the sake of argument, that no one ever found out about this awful scheme. It would have aided whatever perverts or voyeurs that had access either as tech personnel or administrators in the school system. How did this administrator for ONE second think that no one was going to cry foul if he attempted to introduce any of the webcam footage as 'evidence'.
infuriating morally, legally, and as an affront to common sense!
You can't fix stupid.
Submitted by Anonymous on February 18, 2010 - 17:55.
What a twisted bunch of morons and perverts. These are the people educating our children. They rank right up there with the Catholic priests.
Talk about intentional
Submitted by PA Schools...no ethics on February 18, 2010 - 18:19.
Talk about intentional invasion of privacy! Even our education system now has high-tech pedophiles in high places. Can't trust our own school principals and teachers these days.
Pa. schools spy on students using laptop webcams, claims lawsuit
Submitted by Mad as hell on February 18, 2010 - 18:31.
That administrator is very lucky someone didn't take him out back and thrash him.
If that had been my son or Daughter I would have come unwrapped, and the admin would have been very uncomfortable with the way I had returned the computer,
Wow
Submitted by Anonymous HS Student on February 18, 2010 - 18:40.
Wow! Wow! That is so crazy! My school district just started on the one-to-one program -- so we'll all be getting MacBooks with built-in cameras next year. I never would have thought that this could happen! I mean I didn't even think it was possible!
Wow! That is weird and creepy!
I'm definitely covering up my webcam and will try to do something about the microphone, too. That's sick.
Tape over the camera - temporarily
Submitted by beads on February 18, 2010 - 18:47.
Easy enough. You want to see me? Let me know and I'll take that little piece of tape off the camera otherwise - its stays on. Not much to see, folks.
Unbelievable!
Submitted by Anonymous on February 18, 2010 - 19:04.
Until very recently, my son went to this school, and carried one of those laptops. So I guess my home has been under scrutiny from strangers and school administrators! It's amazing that this school district, which clearly has plenty of money, didn't run this idea past their legal department before spying on students. These are the people I'm supposed to trust to educate my son not just in academics, but also in morality. Great.
no sir. morality is what we
Submitted by filipe on February 18, 2010 - 22:14.
no sir. morality is what we families are supposed to teach them! if we leave our moral education to schools this is what happens. i trust teachers to teach their area of expertise, math, english, etc etc, not moral values. something is indeed wrong if we are expecting these kind of folks to teach our children morality. specially the folks from this school!
FAIL
Submitted by Anonymous on February 18, 2010 - 22:38.
If you are counting on the schools to teach your child morality, you have just FAILED as a parent.
That's YOUR job.
I agree, and I do teach him
Submitted by Anonymous on February 19, 2010 - 09:10.
I agree, and I do teach him that. But this is a blatant violation of my son's (and my) Fourth Amendment rights. That's part of the US Constitution, which is what this country was founded upon. So perhaps I expressed myself poorly in my original comment--I guess I should have said that "these are the people I trusted to teach my son about the Constitution."
But frankly, I do think schools are responsible for behaving morally, if they expect to produce graduates who do likewise. If my son's teachers can't be expected to respect the Constitution...that's the real "FAIL." I'd go as far as to call it an "Epic Fail." My son and I both trusted that school to look out for our best interests, and they did not.
[/list][/list]
Class-Action
Submitted by Airstrike on February 18, 2010 - 19:05.
Can I say that generally speaking, I am against just about every class-action lawsuit I have ever heard of (not all, but almost all).
This is one class action lawsuit that should be hammered down someone's throat. I would have thought it was an isolated incident by some perverted IT dude that just happened to know the secret but for the district to actually say that they can do it whenever they want is ABOMINABLE!!
I don't have secrets and I don't mind wiretapping by law enforcement to protect me from terrorists or other criminal behavior, but this act is SICKENING and so ILLEGAL there is no way someone in their right mind would think it was OK on a POLICY level. Whoever makes their policies need to be FIRED and removed FAR from the public education of kids!
I couldn't agree with you
Submitted by Anonymous on February 19, 2010 - 09:11.
I couldn't agree with you more. I'm not for litigating everything, but, as the parent of a student at that school, I will absolutely join a class-action lawsuit.
[/list]
Don't assume
Submitted by Anonymous on February 18, 2010 - 19:21.
People seem to be willing to assume a claim is true even though there has been no evidence presented yet. It could just as easily but some nut case making it all up. There's a lot of them out there.
On the other hand...
Submitted by Anonymous on February 18, 2010 - 19:41.
While I do not condone unathorized viewing of a child's PC I am overly curious about one thing: what was the student doing that promtped the rebuke?
Before you go pediphile on me... suppose the school district has a proper use of the PC policy. And suppose the student was violating hte policy and hte pc is set to "report" the violation by activating the camera.
How is this different than a traffic camera taking my picture should I run the red light.
Your imagination is running wild with thoghts of eavesdropping and spying without hearing any details. Let's get the facts before deciding.
Not a good idea from the sound of it; but let's get the facts.
Is this not a "fact" or "evidence"
Submitted by Airstrike on February 18, 2010 - 19:47.
"Michael Robbins thereafter
verified, through [Assistant Principal] Ms. Matsko, that the school district in fact has the ability to remotely activate the webcam contained in a student's personal laptop computer issued by the school district at any time it chose and to view and capture whatever images were in front of the webcam, all without the knowledge, permission or authorization of any persons then and there using the laptop computer,"
I agree that all the facts needs to come out before final judgement, but it does appear that they verified with the assistant principal that this policy was in place. Maybe it is, maybe she was misinterpreted, who knows?[/list][/list]
They say they verified
Submitted by Anonymous on February 18, 2010 - 20:52.
That's a statement made by the person filing the complaint, so it's not evidence of anything. Evidence would be a third party expert examining the laptops in question for the alleged activity.
[/list]
How is this different than a traffic camera taking my picture?
Submitted by Airstrike on February 18, 2010 - 19:49.
Well, for starters, the traffic camera ISN'T IN YOUR BEDROOM, which is what makes this case atrocious!!
Lawsuits are the least of their worries
Submitted by Anonymous on February 18, 2010 - 19:55.
The school's "PC Policy" is moot at this point. PA law is extremely clear on this matter. You cannot record audio of a third party without their permission. This is a criminal statue and it strictly enforced. TV stations never do undercover reports in PA for this very reason, as it is a violation of the law. Business owners have also been arrested and prosecuted for leaving the audio enabled on their own security cameras. The fact that this could have every been approved and then implemented by a school district seems almost beyond belief. If I was the Principal I would be calling a good criminal lawyer(remember, ignorance of the law is no excuse :->).
[/list][/list]
Copyright © 1994 - 2010 Computerworld Inc.
-
Comments (http://http://www.computerworld.com/comments/node/9158818) left for the above article, "Pennsylvania schools spying on students using laptop webcams, claims lawsuit (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=22&p=385081#p385081)" (by Gregg Keizer; February 18, 2010; Computerworld), #s 41-60:
There is a HUGE difference
Submitted by Anonymous on February 18, 2010 - 21:34.
There is a HUGE difference between a traffic camera in a public place and a camera in my child's bedroom!
For God's sake, it's illegal for law enforcement to record anything in my home without getting a court order. And even when law enforcement does get a court order, their actions are very controlled and monitored. They have to erase any conversations or photo's that don't clearly show illegal activity.
What judge did this Vice-principal get to declare his wire tapping legal?
These people broke the law and belong in jail. For a very, very long time.
Traffic Cam?
Submitted by Anonymous on February 19, 2010 - 09:17.
I'm a parent of one of the students with a laptop, just happen to be married to a lawyer and work for a law firm. Here's the thing: when you leave your house and start driving, you know the traffic cams are there. When you go into your own home, you have a basic expectation of privacy.
The school NEVER disclosed in any way what they were doing with the webcams, but they have admitted it since the one student's parents made the allegations. They have also published a letter to parents yesterday saying that the "security program had been disabled on all laptops."
The district could have avoided all of this by making me sign a release, saying I understood they could activate the camera and mic remotely at any time. If the kid wants the laptop, the parent signs the waiver. But they didn't, and so there I am walking around in my bathrobe while my son is on video-chat.
Everything I just wrote is fact.
Homes are not roadways
Submitted by Anonymous on February 27, 2010 - 18:56.
One the otherhand asks how is this different than a camera snapping a picture of me running a red light? It is apples and oranges. On the road is public space and it is taking a picture in that public space. Activating a remote webcam inside someone's home is wiretapping and it is illegal without a warrant. There is now an FBI investigation, but if the allegations prove true they broke the law- BIG LAWS.
[/list][/list]
Another possible explanation
Submitted by Ryan on February 18, 2010 - 20:02.
What are the chances that the student was using the webcam to take inappropriate pictures of himself, then saving it on the laptop? Then the school found out and searched the laptop. Then the student, in an effort to put the blame on the school, told his parents that the school could remotely activate the webcam. It might be a long-shot, but I would say that this scenario would be a plausible explanation.
Confirmed by another student
Submitted by Xpress on February 19, 2010 - 02:49.
I just watched Channel 10 news and there was a student (not the plaintiff) who said that when she was working at her computer, she would notice the little green light for the webcam just go on by itself. She was writing a paper and it happened more than once.
So with that verificiation and the fact that the school claiming it had the right to remotely activate the webcams, I'd say it was going occurring. Most kids do their homework in their rooms. Which is also the place where they change into their clothes after a shower (amongst many other things that they believe they are doing in the PRIVACY of their own bedrooms).
My guess is there has been a lot of erasing going on at Lower Merion and Harriton since the parents' of the student who was confronted challenged the policy. Oops, we loop these tapes and we only have the last week. Or they will say it didn't violate wiretap laws because no audio was recorded. But this is a major invasion of privacy. I doubt that the school board or solicitor had any idea it was occurring. It was likely the VP saying, wow, look at this function...wouldn't that be cool to check out and see what they are doing at home. Their own reality tv entertainment!
[/list]
Totally false story...
Submitted by Anonymous on February 18, 2010 - 20:03.
After further investigation on the School District website, it appears this story is a gross distortion and misrepresentation. The webcam security feature was activated only once at the request of the student who owned the laptop, which had been stolen. The webcam image was used to identify the thief and now the parents of the thief are trying to evade the theft charges with a frivolous lawsuit. American legal system hijacked again with the help of sloppy reporting...
The school district issued a
Submitted by Seth O on February 18, 2010 - 20:26.
The school district issued a response including this:
"This feature has only been used for the limited purpose of locating a lost, stolen or missing laptop. The District has not used the tracking feature or web cam for any other purpose or in any other manner whatsoever."
The only problem is...that's a flat-out lie. It's directly contradictory to the *fact* that a vice principal used a photo taken via this feature on a laptop that was not reported missing; this act started this whole case, and is the only reason students and their families are now aware of the feature.
How about some duct tape?
Submitted by Anonymous on February 18, 2010 - 20:44.
The school district is clearly in the wrong on this.
That said, the students can apply some duct tape to the webcam to prevent unauthorized viewing. Problem solved!
This is the BIGGER PROBLEM.
Submitted by Anonymous on February 18, 2010 - 20:47.
This is the BIGGER PROBLEM. Please re-read this...
"Michael and Holly Robbins of Penn Valley, Pa., said they first found out about the alleged spying last November after their son Blake was accused by a Harriton High School official of "improper behavior in his home" and shown a photograph taken by his laptop."
Who in fornicating nether world do those piles of excrement think they are?!? "improper behavior in his home"??? They are NOT his parents. They are just teachers and have absolutely NO right to make any judgment as to what a student does at home!!!!!
This is what all the 'progressive' educators want. Following us in our homes and dictating what is and is not proper behavior. WAKE TH F_ UP PEOPLE and see what is happening!
Notice the word "said"
Submitted by Anonymous on February 18, 2010 - 21:04.
Please pay attention to the word "said". Talk is cheap and lies are easy. The nature of this complaint makes me immediately think of a scam looking for payoff like someone that finds a chicken head in their mcnuggets. Scams like that work off sensationalist claims in order to get media pressure to the point the target will just do a payoff to avoid more press.
Stop Yourself
Submitted by Anonymous on February 19, 2010 - 01:37.
You have no idea what "progressive education" is. Quit trying to universalize and politicize the actions of one ridiculously overzealous (judging by the information that is available) school administrator.
[/list]
Forget lawsuits. These folks
Submitted by Anonymous on February 18, 2010 - 21:16.
Forget lawsuits. These folks broke the law. It's time for prison!
WOW
Submitted by Hall Monitor on February 18, 2010 - 21:57.
http://detentionslip.org (http://detentionslip.org) ! Check it out for all the crazy headlines from our schools.[/list]
Good grief
Submitted by Pete on February 18, 2010 - 22:32.
Frankly, I'm amazed the officials involved aren't being sent down for the attempt to produce and view child pornography; given the absolute certainty that they'd catch at least some children unclothed in their bedrooms.
More than meets the eye
Submitted by Anonymous on February 18, 2010 - 23:35.
The Robbins family say the school showed them a picture "taken by the webcam." From the statement on the LMSD website it seems that there is a considerable difference of opinion as to *who* might have taken the photo, if one was taken. If the student that took the shot in question and not the school, and the school was simply able to access, this is really a whole other matter. These laptops are the property of the school and detailed terms of use agreements were signed by all students and parents.
Let's hear let all the evidence come out before jumping to conclusions. I am betting on the fact that there is more to the story than meets the eye.
Not a bad point
Submitted by Schlock on February 19, 2010 - 00:37.
This actually makes a fair amount of sense. It seems a lot more likely that the school would be reacting to a photo taken by the student himself using the school hardware, as opposed to remotely activating the camera then admonishing the student for inappropriate behavior at home.
[/list]
Pennsylvania schools spying on students using laptop Webcams, cl
Submitted by jimmyc16 on February 18, 2010 - 23:38.
After a public flogging in the nude, the officials involved should be imprisoned for at least 10 years.
*Puts tape over webcam* They
Submitted by Anonymous on February 18, 2010 - 23:44.
*Puts tape over webcam* They can listen to me if they'd like though.
If at anytime someone says
Submitted by Anonymous on February 19, 2010 - 01:47.
If at anytime someone says they are from the government and have something "free" for you, be afraid, be very afraid. Duct tape your webcam/microphone now.
Easy, just put a small piece
Submitted by Joe on February 19, 2010 - 02:51..
Easy, just put a small piece of duct or painter's tape over the webcam.
Copyright © 1994 - 2010 Computerworld Inc.
-
Comments (http://http://www.computerworld.com/comments/node/9158818) left for the above article, "Pennsylvania schools spying on students using laptop webcams, claims lawsuit (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=22&p=385081#p385081)" (by Gregg Keizer; February 18, 2010; Computerworld), #s 61-75:
Schools need to get back to
Submitted by Anonymous on February 19, 2010 - 06:18.
Schools need to get back to teaching reading, writing and arithmetic. If they did we wouldn't have so many problems with the school system.
As for the cameras, nothing will come of this other than a slap on the wrist, if that. The fact some Bozo thought this was permissible in the first place tells me all I need to know about our wonderful public school system.
Truth or ??
Submitted by Anonymous on February 19, 2010 - 08:49.
Of course you are all assuming this is true simply because it is reported - all that has been confirmed so far is the ability to do it - no surprise there. For all you know the kid somehow took the picture himself and then it got synced back to the school servers later. Only time will tell! Should be interesting no matter what comes out in the wash.
I don't buy it
Submitted by Gustav on February 19, 2010 - 11:30.
Bull - School IT people aren't competent enough to pull this off. I'll bet some kid took pictures himself, and the school later found them on his computer.
Grubby Americans
Submitted by Fekall on February 19, 2010 - 12:08.
"The Robbins family has asked for unspecified compensatory and punitive damages"--Give us money! We deserve MONEY for being spied on! American Money Whores..
cable boxes are next
Submitted by RD on February 19, 2010 - 15:14.
I'm actually surprised that the government hasn't actually done this to our high speed connected cable boxes. Getting americans to bring cameras into their living rooms without the government having to pay a dime.
well people now lents not
Submitted by Anonymous on February 19, 2010 - 19:32.
well people now lents not for get who is behind this program and why they started it you have to stop and think why our government would want to spend millions to teach our kids. If the school can do it rest assure uncle sam can to and has with out worring about what would happen Bush was know for wirer tapping and a few other things
Educashion (pun intended.)
Submitted by Anonymous on February 19, 2010 - 20:40.
It's obvious that you never graduated the sixth grade. Your spelling, grammar and lack of punctuation is proof of that. Perhaps if someone had spied on you, you would have spent time actually reading your school books instead of playing with your willie while looking at the pictures in your step daddy's dirty magazines when you were a kid.
[/list]
Innocent until proven guilty
Submitted by Anonymous on February 20, 2010 - 14:50.
It appears that almost everybody posting here has already decided that the school district is guilty and somebody needs to have some horrible punishment dealt out to them. Has anyone considered that we don't know what really happened, we only have the claims made by the kid and his parents? While their claims may be the God's honest truth, they may also be nothing more than an effort to extract a large cash settlement from the school district.
Like probably 99.9999% of everyone reading the posts about this case, I know nobody involved in this case and have therefore no reason to believe one side over the other. Thus it would be wrong to invent punishments for school district employees who have yet to be convicted of any crime.
The last thing we need in this country is another Tawana Brawley or Duke LaCross case. Let's let this play out to completion in the courts. Innocent until proven guilty is after all still the law of the land.
audio/visual bugging (illegal)
Submitted by Anonymous on February 20, 2010 - 20:20.
This is not fair use of monitoring capabilities, that might be covered under terms of use.
This is audio/visual bugging, and the stored data will contain illegally obtained images, video, and audio recordings, including what might easily be classed as pornographic (due to the age of subjects).
This needs to be dealt with harshly.
Wait a minute - innocent until proven guilty!
Submitted by Anonymous on February 21, 2010 - 12:32.
Computers are changing the face of education. The district applied for those laptops for all the students in the district to help the students raise grades levels. (They don't do that here in Los Angeles).
Those laptops are expensive and having a way to retrieve them is a good idea. Don't misunderstand me, the district was wrong.
As a parent, I want to monitor my child and wish I had a way to peek in on them whenever I want. The district should give the software to monitor the laptops and the codes to the parents, so they can monitor their child's laptops.
Furthermore, the district should get out of the laptop retrieving business altogether. By renting, selling or better yet giving the laptops to the kids! Have the parent insure them in case of theft or damage. That way the district doesn't care if the laptops are stolen. They aren't expecting them back anyway. Hopefully, the students have a computer to take on to college. Who wants a 3 or 4 year old laptop that is obsolete?
The district made a mistake in not providing a full disclosure and spying on the kids. I think to brand them pedophile's is alarmist. In this time of recession and teacher layoffs for a district to think for helping their students by providing laptops is commendable.
In the future, all students in the country maybe issued a laptop like device with a webcam to assist them in meeting their educational goals. (It's coming) These issues regarding their use need to be resolved now.
I think we as parents should provide a laptop to our kids and the district should help provide laptops for kids families who can't afford to do so.
Pa schools spying on the students
Submitted by Anonymous on February 22, 2010 - 13:48.
I hope the personal responsible and the school distric lose a ton of money, and the personal involed get ail time.
What would happen if the
Submitted by Anonymous on February 22, 2010 - 22:58.
What would happen if the web-cams were destroyed? Would the student be libel? It is a wrong thing for the school to do.
Wait, so they did this to
Submitted by Anonymous on February 23, 2010 - 18:02.
Wait, so they did this to "this" student? How many other students have they done this to without anyone reporting it? Have they just been randomly spying on their students? These are students! Some people leave their Macbooks on for long periods of time, even as they're doing unrelated things! What if one of the students was undressing or doing something private during one of the times they spied on their students????
There's no justification for this, on top of invasion of privacy violation of rights and wiretapping laws this potentially goes into the areas of child pornography!!!!
This is not acceptable! This is not acceptable at all. Anyone that had access to remotely viewing students through the webcams on their macbooks needs to be subjected to serious and in depth investigations regardless of whether they were responsible for this particular incident or not.
Insurance not cameras
Submitted by Anonymous on February 27, 2010 - 19:16.
It has now come to light that every student was requried to purcahse a $55 insurance policy for the computer they were assigned- so ALL of this spying was compeltely unnessecary. They simply needed to file claims. Why they did not is unclear. What is clear that the spying was unnessecary and innapropriate considering the laptops were insured, and wiretapping is illegal. I have serious questions about the claim that it was for security purposes only. Indeed, many students report that the green activation light of the webcam would come on randomly. Whether this was the actions of a rogue employee or the nefarious actions of a school district saying one thing and doing another is yet to be discovered- but we all need to take time and have dialogue with EVERY shcool district about what they are and are not doing- and set limits. School don't get a blank check and they NEED boundries. Now is the prefect time for parents to become more involved with what is going on at their school. Because if this case teaches us anything- schools don't seem to be using their trust and newly aquired technology productively.
Looking back to my teenage
Submitted by Anonymous on June 5, 2010 - 04:32.
Looking back to my teenage boy years, i know exactly what i used my computer for in the privacy of my own bedroom... Thats not a series of photos i would want others to have. Excuse my candor but those cameras probably saw more "state of undress" than "state of dress". Thats pretty messed up. I hope the school's admin (particularly the "soap opera" ones) are forever humiliated by this. i think that would be a worse punishment than most others.
Copyright © 1994 - 2010 Computerworld Inc.