DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum School spied on students via webcams

Article.

Suit: School spied on students via webcams
Cameras allegedly caught students and families in compromising situations

PHILADELPHIA - A suburban Philadelphia school district used school-issued laptop webcams to spy on students at home, potentially catching them and their families in compromising situations, a family claims in a federal lawsuit.

Lower Merion School District officials can activate the webcams without students' knowledge or permission, the suit said. Plaintiffs Michael and Holly Robbins suspect the cameras captured students and family members as they undressed and in other embarrassing situations, according to the suit.

Tom Halperin, a 15-year-old sophomore from Wynnewood, said students are "pretty disgusted" and have started putting masking tape over their computer webcams and microphones. He noted that his class recently read "1984," the George Orwell classic that coined the term "Big Brother."

"This is just bogus," Halperin said. "I just think it's really despicable that they have the ability to just watch me all the time."

The accusations amount to potentially illegal electronic wiretapping, said Witold J. Walczak, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania, which is not involved in the case.

"School officials cannot, any more than police, enter into the home either electronically or physically without an invitation or a warrant," Walczak said.

The school district could not immediately confirm whether it has the ability to activate the webcams remotely, a spokesman said.

"We can categorically state that we are and have always been committed to protecting the privacy of our students," said the spokesman, Doug Young.

The affluent district prides itself on its technology initiatives, which include giving laptops to each of the approximately 2,300 students at its two high schools.

"It is no accident that we arrived ahead of the curve; in Lower Merion, our responsibility is to lead," Superintendent Christopher W. McGinley wrote on the district Web site. McGinley did not immediately return a message left Thursday by The Associated Press.

The Robbinses said they learned of the alleged webcam images when Lindy Matsko, an assistant principal at Harriton High School, told their son that school officials thought he had engaged in improper behavior at home. The behavior was not specified in the suit.

"(Matsko) cited as evidence a photograph from the webcam embedded in minor plaintiff's personal laptop issued by the school district," the suit states.

Matsko later confirmed to Michael Robbins that the school had the ability to activate the webcams remotely, according to the suit, which was filed Tuesday and which seeks class-action status.

Neither the Robbinses nor their lawyer, Mark S. Haltzman, returned messages left Thursday by The Associated Press.

In 2001, the U.S. Supreme Court reaffirmed the privacy of the home in a case that said police could not permeate a home with infrared lights to see if a suspect was using heat lamps to grow marijuana. Technology or no, Supreme Court precedents "draw a firm line at the entrance to the house," Justice Antonin Scalia wrote.

"This isn't just them spying on the kids, this is them intruding on the parents' home. Who knows what they are seeing?" Walczak said. "The courts for 80 years have said there's no greater sanctuary than a person's own home."

Halperin said, "School ends at the end of the school property, so they shouldn't really be in our business at home."

I'm pretty disgusted by this and the fact the school thinks this is perfectly ok. If this happened to my kids I would be furious. I really dislike people being so quick to sue over seemingly the smallest of things, but in this case I hope the families take the school to the cleaners for this. I hope the school gets those illegal wiretapping charges, and on top of it I'd like to see a child pornography charge tacked on for video taping minors while they were undressing in their bedrooms. I'm usually the last person to get up in arms and I usually think people who do are a little but this has me pretty mad.

This is just unbelievable. I am absolutely disgusted.

And if a school can do this, do people honestly think that it would be a problem for the government?

I'm waiting for the facts to decide which side I'm disgusted with.
Perhaps what was observed was that the boy was using a stolen lap-top?
If so, perhaps instead of the parents wringing the kid's neck they called in the ACLU?
It should be interesting to follow.

From letter sent to parents from school district:

Upon a report of a suspected lost, stolen or missing laptop, the feature would be activated by the District's security and technology departments. The security feature's capabilities were limited to taking a still image of the operator and the operator's screen. This feature was only used for the narrow purpose of locating a lost, stolen or missing laptop. The District never activated the security feature for any other purpose or in any other manner whatsoever.

http://www.lmsd.org/sections/news/default.php?m=0&t=today&p=lmsd_anno&id=1138

So, in other words, it's the school's version of Lojack.

Used in this manner I see no reason to be upset about this.

That may very well be the case, however, when you consider that many a pervert work in schools it opens a Pandora's Box to potential abuse.

Add the fact that they are giving the laptops to students, and it's a student they are talking about, I am skeptical of the theft idea proposed by Reckon.

I am a little leery of OnStar as well. How do I know it's off and someone isn't listening in on a private conversation . . . or my incredibly bad singing voice?

Haha! Up next on American OnStar Idol....GMdawg!

Wow.. not sure about this one. On one hand I suppose the school has the right to track the whereabouts of it's property if the technology is available... on the other hand it seems like it would be pretty easy to abuse if somebody was so inclined.

rule #1: when using non-person computers/laptops, keep them powered down when not in use.
rule #2: always inspect assigned devices for tracking hardware/software.
rule #3: read the usage policies that come with such devices.
rule #4: quit being pansies, and go buy your own damn laptops.

What a bunch of BS, if it happened to me I'd be fuming mad

it will be interesting if this went down as the article says, I think the school may be in some big trouble...

Quote:

---

What a bunch of BS, if it happened to me I'd be fuming mad

---

So, if you had stolen the laptop, you would be upset if they used this to track you down and get their property back?

Them retrieving their property isn't the issue at all, they absolutely have the right to track their laptop down if it gets stolen. They can put a tracking device on there that doesn't have the ability to spy on students. Whether it was the intended use of this security feature or not, it still allowed them to do so if they chose to do so. With how many stories that have been out lately of school officials having sex with students, do you REALLY want them to have this ability? Do you want to give some sick ... the ability to watch a teenage girl undress to get in the shower without them knowing because it can also allow them to retrieve the laptop if it gets stolen? Seriously?

I am just assuming that the students didn't know about this "feature" because the article said that once the students found out about it, they started putting tape over the cameras so they couldn't be watched. Seems like a logical conclusion to come to.

Being intruded on like that in the name of security, in my opinion, is going too far and is not ok. The supreme court agrees with me:

Quote:

---

Technology or no, Supreme Court precedents "draw a firm line at the entrance to the house," Justice Antonin Scalia wrote.

---

The school is in deep crap no matter what the justification for doing this was. And rightfully so.

I guess well see.. stay tuned, I'm sure we haven't heard the last of this...

Being the small government conservative free market capitalist that I am, I wish to chime in on a few things and expand on my earlier post.

I have a few questions:

1. Were the laptops the "property" of the school and "lent or rented" to the students.
2. did the students or the parents have to sign a waiver and agree to a TOS or AUP?

If the answers to question #1 and question #2 are correct then the court should throw this case out for the following reasons:

A: The laptops are property of the school. They DO NOT belong to the parents or the student. As far as I know, As long an an individual american pays his taxes, a person can do whatever he/she wants with property they own as long as they are upfront about it in a legit way.

B: If the parents and students DID NOT read the AUP or TOS consenting to monitoring for maintenance and administrative purposes(I have yet to see a AUP, TOS or Disclaimer that doesn't have this wording in it) then that is the parents and students fault.

There should be ZERO expectation of privacy when using a public network, a wifi hot spot, or a computer or notebook that is the property of someone else and DOESN'T belong to the person who is using it.

If they wanted privacy, then buy their own notebook/lpatop/personal computer...nothing is stopping them....if they don't agree to the terms, there are options.

A lawsuit like this if won will just be utter stupidity and will cause a total diaster for AUP, TOS, and risk Management practices by small businesses and coporations world wide.

I mean whats next? It will be illegal for a company to monitor their employees internet surfing habits on company time on company owned computers and connections?

give me a break

this is a very slippery slope folks..


its garbage like this that hurts small business

is it any wonder companies set up shop overseas for petes sake!

its because of draconian ideas like this

people should be allowed to do whatever they want with property they own.

if the school wants to take these notebooks out and break them on the sidewalk, it should be their right...its their property for crying out loud.

only in America do we have neighbors and people who try to tell others what they can and can't do with their own property.....

The High School has no business trying to police what kids do off school premises. Especially what kids do at their homes. That is their business and their parents business.

Schools don't need to try to be the vice squad. That is up to law enforcement---not assistant principals.

So you'd be perfectly ok with it if I loaned you something you needed for your home that I had an extra of, and then I used it to record you or your family whenever I deemed it a good idea that I do so without you or their knowledge? Thats all ok because its mine and I can do whatever I want with it?

:::Raising the BS flag:::

My cable company owns my dvr...if it had a camera inside, would it be okay for them to take pictures of my living room or bedroom whenever they please?

I seriously doubt the school's agreement mentioned taking pictures and recording audio just because they felt like it.

Thanks Reckon for the link. I was suspicious about it being stolen WITHOUT knowledge that many were and have been recovered using this snooping.

That being said, HOWEVER . . .

Quote:

---

There should be ZERO expectation of privacy when using a public network, a wifi hot spot, or a computer or notebook that is the property of someone else and DOESN'T belong to the person who is using it.

---

I agree in spirit with your mindset, I disagree that one isn't afforded some degree of privacy even if in public or using corporate/government/school equipment. For example, at work, I can reasonably expect that the company can/will monitor my internet browsing and as such I restrict what sites I visit to basic news and dawgtalkers and little little else.

I can even understand that they can/will intercept any and all emails and as such I am very cautious on what I write. You also never know who will forward it onwards.

I know they have cameras covering the parking lot and in several spots inside, like entrances, storage yard, break room, and trailers yard. I expect them to monitor those activity in those areas. I would not expect them in the restrooms or underneath peoples' desks.

But that is exactly what this school district is doing. If it was a matter of stolen laptops, crack open the cases and insert a gps tracker.This is snooping into childrens' private lives.

Today, nothing surprises me anymore. I would be willing to wager a small sum that some administrator has illegal snapshots of his/her students.

In this particular case, I believe the TOS is that the school can activate the cameras only if there is an allegation of theft. If the camera was activated for any other reason then you may very well see that it isn't the first time the school did this and someone may see jail time.

We close and lock our house doors for a reason. We expect security and privacy there.

Quote:

---

Whether it was the intended use of this security feature or not, it still allowed them to do so if they chose to do so.

---

Agreed. If I were in this family's shoes, I'd be furious as well. And even though I'm not crazy about our society's love of frivilous litigation, I'd be taking them to court.

Ok michelle that I can agree with

I just think some may misunderstand me

Im looking at the "bigger picture here" then just the school

say you take a company laptop home to do company business

does the company have the right to monitor their laptop that belongs to them?

that is my crux of this argument

the employee doesn't have to take the company laptop home if he chooses not to take it home with him.

I just want to know if the parents signed a waiver agreeing to monitoring due to the laptops belong to the school..if they signed such an agreement, they agreed to it..

I agree kids should not be spied on

I also agree the school shouldn't require kids to install spying software on laptops or computers they own either.

was this the case of a school administrator abusing his post?

should the school be sused because of a ignorant administrator?

or maybe the individual should be sued and fired from the school

IDK, if you are meeting her at the "white house next to the old bomb factory".

You might want to keep an eye out for black helicopters and men in dark glasses talking to their wrist.

I really think you are missing the point of this particular case. I have not read where the laptop in question was stolen. That being the case . . . then the school has breached it's own contract if and only if they stated that the only time they activate the camera is in cases of stolen property.

Since the laptop in question was not stolen then why did they flip the switch, in breach of TOS, and invade someone's privacy? AND, did they do it before and to whom?

If I take a company laptop home and its being used then does the company have the right to check that it was being used to complete my work rather than watch dumb people bite it on youtube? Sure, most people would say that is reasonable.

Do they have the right to power on the webcam remotely and video tape me at random moments of the day without my knowledge when I'm not using it because they have a suspicion about me? You are the ONLY person who seems to think that is reasonable. Do you have a guess why that is?