subject:"Re\: \[CGUYS\] Twist in school spying scandal"

  The Lower Merion School District and the parents of the accused and
spied upon student have agreed to a 30 day hold as relates to the
advancement of the lawsuit that is pending against the school system.
This hold will be maintained in order to facilitate an audit of the
surveillance that took place.  This audit is being performed by a
computer security firm out of New York.  This audit, primarily being
undertaken to ascertain the actual number of instances in which
surveillance took place for any reason, may not return an accurate
accounting of those events.  Because the school system has no
requirements that logs or evidence of such activity need to be
maintained, there could be a lot of pertinent information that has
already been deleted from the computers used to activate the
surveillance system.

  Also, it now appears as though the surveillance was illegal to begin
with.  Pennsylvania law apparently prohibits any type of visual or
audio surveillance that intrudes into any domicile unless specific
permission has been granted to do so.  This is essentially the same
requirement throughout the entire United States.  Usually, said
permission requires a warrant in any jurisdiction.  The school system
has neither claimed or established that it had obtained any form of
legal permission to enter into the surveillance that was undertaken.
It begins to appear as though the school system displayed a lot of
excess hubris in their decision to essentially take the law into their
own hands regarding claims of stolen or missing laptop computers.  The
fact that the upper echelon of the school board is stuffed with
lawyers makes the decision to enter into such surveillance even more
puzzling.  One would think that they, of all people, would know
better.

  Steve


*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

On 03/11/2010 10:13 AM, phartz...@gmail.com wrote:
 Usually, said
 permission requires a warrant in any jurisdiction.  The school system
 has neither claimed or established that it had obtained any form of
 legal permission to enter into the surveillance that was undertaken.
 It begins to appear as though the school system displayed a lot of
 excess hubris in their decision to essentially take the law into their
 own hands regarding claims of stolen or missing laptop computers.


I hate it when legal analysis gets into issues like this.  For example,
did the parents and students agree to cooperate in efforts to recover a
missing or stolen laptop assigned to the student?  If they did, then
they may well have agreed to such a recovery tactic even if said tactic
wasn't explicitly agreed to.  People can give up an awful lot of what
appears to be a right in order to work, or even get usage of a computer.

Incidentally, it should be noted that the fact negotiations are now
apparently occurring means that at least one side doesn't want this to
go to trial and possibly both.


*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-11 Thread Stewart Marshall


Art I agree with you, but it does raise some pretty significant legal issues.

Was the school within it's rights to have this type of tracking 
system?  (Apparently not according to PA law.)


Did the school inform the parents/students about this type of tracking ability?

I hope this does get settled, and I hope the school system gets a 
better tracking capabilty than it has.


Stewart


At 10:26 AM 3/11/2010, you wrote:

I hate it when legal analysis gets into issues like this.  For example,
did the parents and students agree to cooperate in efforts to recover a
missing or stolen laptop assigned to the student?  If they did, then
they may well have agreed to such a recovery tactic even if said tactic
wasn't explicitly agreed to.  People can give up an awful lot of what
appears to be a right in order to work, or even get usage of a computer.

Incidentally, it should be noted that the fact negotiations are now
apparently occurring means that at least one side doesn't want this to
go to trial and possibly both.



*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-11 Thread b_s-wilk


 Trouble is from what was said they knew who had it.



Nope, they knew after they had pictures from the webcam, not before.
Suspecting someone has something and having proof that same individual
has it are two different things and usually two different sets of
circumstances too.

It should be noted that the parents filed this suit after they too had
been informed of the possible drug usage and the record of the possible
drug usage wasn't removed from the student's record.


Of course the school knew who had the computers. This assertion that 
they didn't is insulting to schools and to teachers. When any kind of 
electronics are borrowed from schools by teachers or students there are 
records of who has the equipment. Lower Merion is a wealthy district and 
they have a lot of equipment, but that doesn't mean that they simply 
hand it out to anyone without a record of who borrowed it.


The case of Lower Merion is more like a public library that often 
requires some kind of collateral to borrow some equipment.  Or for those 
instances that don't require collateral [like cash or your driver's 
license] they still know who has the material/equipment.


The IT creeps who spied on the students had to know who they were 
watching [MAC address, installed software, etc]. Since the 
administration also knew who had the computers, it was their 
responsibility to contact the parents, as it was also the parents' 
responsibility to pay the insurance fee--if they could afford it. There 
are areas with low-income families in the district [Ardmore, Narberth], 
as well as students who are bused into the schools--no excuse, but not 
everyone in the district is upper middle class.


Perhaps the issue isn't the method for distributing computers and the 
accompanying fees, along with the spying. The real issue is that the 
computers are required at all, and students are required to have them, 
take them home, use them for school work, especially since there is very 
little evidence that using the computers aids students in learning 
more/better/faster. The convenience is more for the schools than for the 
students.


Betty


*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-11 Thread Rev. Stewart Marshall


The IT issue is not all that clear.

Apparently they may have not that info at hand when they were told 
what one to access.


remember in some of these cases, compartmented information is a real issue.

Stewart

At 12:15 PM 3/11/2010, you wrote:
The IT creeps who spied on the students had to know who they were 
watching [MAC address, installed software, etc]. Since the 
administration also knew who had the computers, it was their 
responsibility to contact the parents, as it was also the parents' 
responsibility to pay the insurance fee--if they could afford it. 
There are areas with low-income families in the district [Ardmore, 
Narberth], as well as students who are bused into the schools--no 
excuse, but not everyone in the district is upper middle class.


Betty


Rev. Stewart A. Marshall
mailto:popoz...@earthlink.net
Prince of Peace www.princeofpeaceozark.org
Ozark, AL  SL 82


*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-11 Thread Stewart Marshall


Our concepts of privacy are all an illusion.

People have known about us for years, it was just kept to each other, 
or gossiped around town.


Now with computers, they just have hard copy of it, and are able to 
distribute it in a more efficient pattern.


I am in one of the most open profession around.  Everyone knows my 
business, from my vacation schedule to where I go on vacation to 
sometimes my utility usage ad nauseam.


My pay, benefit, and perks are all published for everyone to see.

My business (including family business) has always been public 
knowledge (believe me living in a small town, nothing is ever private 
knowledge)


So lets give up on this illusion of privacy.  There has never really 
been privacy.  It was just an illusion and a bad one at that.


Stewart


At 11:53 AM 3/11/2010, you wrote:

  Is that what the digital age is bringing us?  As far as I can see,
we are all surrendering a lot more of our rights and freedoms as a
result of our digitally oriented lifestyles.

  I was just reading about digital smart electric meters that are
being installed all across the country.  These new meters collect
electric usage statistics on a moment-to-moment basis and store those
statistics.  These stats can be used to indicate what time people wake
up, when they go to bed, when they cook their meals or take baths or
leave for work and come home again.  The collected stats can be sold
by the electric utility companies to marketers, to be handed to
governmental agencies or to just about anyone who will pay for the
information that is gathered.  Such information can even be hacked
into for criminal purposes.  There are virtually no rules, laws or
guidelines to protect the privacy rights of persons who live where
these meters are used.

  Steve



*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 1:15 PM, b_s-wilk b1sun...@yahoo.es wrote:

 The real issue is that the
 computers are required at all, and students are required to have them, take
 them home, use them for school work, especially since there is very little
 evidence that using the computers aids students in learning
 more/better/faster.

  Since the students are required to use the provided computers, and
none other, to do their homework, how would any student be able to do
their homework if their parents had failed to pay the $55 insurance
fee which meant that the computer was not allowed to leave the school
grounds?  Why punish the student in such a fashion for a failure on
the part of the parents?  Why wasn't the cost of insurance, a pittance
compared to what the school system paid for each computer, simply paid
by the school?  After all, the computers belonged to the school, not
to the student or his or her parents.

  Steve


*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Stewart Marshall
revsamarsh...@earthlink.net wrote:

 Our concepts of privacy are all an illusion.

  That certainly is the case today, much more so than in the past.  Of
that, I am sure.  And tomorrow we will all have fewer rights to
privacy, and the day after that and the day after that.

  I just saw Joe Lieberman, the senator, talking about some additional
security measures soon to be implemented in our useless war on
terror.  He said that we all need to give up just a bit more of our
privacy to achieve this end.  Well, every single time some new scheme
is hatched in this war that is being waged against a state of mind, we
are told that a little bit more of our freedoms must be surrendered.
How long will it take before, bit by bit, nibble by nibble, all of our
freedoms and rights of privacy are gone?


 People have known about us for years, it was just kept to each other, or
 gossiped around town.

 Now with computers, they just have hard copy of it, and are able to
 distribute it in a more efficient pattern.

  Who is this they that you refer to?  It is not I, and it is not
you, I don't think.  It is primarily business and government.  You and
I, I presume, do not go about collecting and collating data on persons
and their movements and habits.  You and I perhaps know some of those
facts about folks that we personally know, but we, I presume, do not
know that sort of information about hordes of folks that we do not
know and have probably never seen and never will.


 So lets give up on this illusion of privacy.  There has never really been
 privacy.  It was just an illusion and a bad one at that.

  I'll not argue that there was ever full privacy, but there certainly
was more of it than exists today, and there will be less of it
tomorrow...guaranteed.

  Steve


*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

On 03/11/2010 11:44 AM, Stewart Marshall wrote:
 Art I agree with you, but it does raise some pretty significant legal
 issues.
 
 Was the school within it's rights to have this type of tracking system? 
 (Apparently not according to PA law.)

Funnily enough despite PA statutes, this is probably unsettled law.

 Did the school inform the parents/students about this type of tracking
 ability?

I suspect that the school district didn't but the parents and students
likely signed a blind release that could at least arguably authorize
such tracking.


 I hope this does get settled, and I hope the school system gets a better
 tracking capabilty than it has.

What nobody seems to have noticed is that the school officials in
apparent good faith, tried to stop what it considered to likely be drug
usage, there was not an apparent attempt to involve the police once it
had determined who had removed the laptop from school.  I have lots of
bones to pick with Lower Merion but not over how it tried to deal with
what its officials perceived as drug usage.  Incidentally I'm a cynic, I
note how the pictures of the youth and his behavior with MikeIke
hasn't been released by his side.


*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 4:04 PM, Art Clemons artclem...@aol.com wrote:

 Incidentally I'm a cynic, I
 note how the pictures of the youth and his behavior with MikeIke
 hasn't been released by his side.

  From what I have recently read about this, the parents of the
student in question have requested a copy of that photo but the school
has declined to provide it thus far.

  Steve


*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

On 03/11/2010 04:28 PM, phartz...@gmail.com wrote:
   From what I have recently read about this, the parents of the
 student in question have requested a copy of that photo but the school
 has declined to provide it thus far.
 

If the lawyers involved haven't already gotten all of the pictures
involved, I'ld be heartily shocked.  Discovery is a tricky thing, but
somehow something as major as the webcam photo wouldn't be missed in a
suit, no matter how collegial the process is.


*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

On 03/11/2010 01:15 PM, b_s-wilk wrote:
 Of course the school knew who had the computers. This assertion that
 they didn't is insulting to schools and to teachers. When any kind of
 electronics are borrowed from schools by teachers or students there are
 records of who has the equipment. Lower Merion is a wealthy district and
 they have a lot of equipment, but that doesn't mean that they simply
 hand it out to anyone without a record of who borrowed it.

No the school district can't have known who had the missing laptop when
it began activating the webcam.  There may well have been a likelihood
that one individual had it, but said individual was not supposed to
remove the laptop from school unless certain other conditions were met.

 The case of Lower Merion is more like a public library that often
 requires some kind of collateral to borrow some equipment.  Or for those
 instances that don't require collateral [like cash or your driver's
 license] they still know who has the material/equipment.

Someone who reads a book within the library usually doesn't have to
produce some form of ID like a library card or license.  While a laptop
may have been issued for in school usage, it wasn't supposed to leave
the school without purchasing the insurance and likely filling out forms.

 The IT creeps who spied on the students had to know who they were
 watching [MAC address, installed software, etc]. Since the
 administration also knew who had the computers, it was their
 responsibility to contact the parents, as it was also the parents'
 responsibility to pay the insurance fee--if they could afford it. There
 are areas with low-income families in the district [Ardmore, Narberth],
 as well as students who are bused into the schools--no excuse, but not
 everyone in the district is upper middle class.

Once again, how could they know unless they were psychic?  Besides, it
isn't clear the IT folk were in charge of the records for which student
had which laptop.  It appears a school official asked that said laptop
be located because it was missing.

That's a different circumstance than your hypothetical above.  I note
incidentally that similar software is common in many businesses, and
that the Adeona project was supposed to offer a similar service for free.

http://adeona.cs.washington.edu/

Of course, the server used wasn't adequate and new usage isn't allowed.
 I wonder just how many folk used Adeona to find missing laptops.

I have met folks who have no consideration for privacy.

Finally if I remember correctly, one can change which Mac address recent
apple computers offer with networking at least temporarily.  Changing
the mac address wouldn't affect adeona for example.


*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-10 Thread phartz...@gmail.com

On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 7:10 PM, Art Clemons artclem...@aol.com wrote:

 Suspecting someone has something and having proof that same individual
 has it are two different things and usually two different sets of
 circumstances too.

  This is true, and it is too bad that the school apparently forgot
about that fact.  The Vice Principal at the school ostensibly told the
student and his parents that Blake, the student in question, had been
captured by the camera of engaging in inappropriate behavior,
specifically the ingestion of drugs which turned out to me candies.
The Vice Principal claimed drug use to be fact, not suspicion.  That
was a major blunder, and that was the inappropriate behavior in this
case as opposed to anything that the student had done.

  That Vice Principal issued an in-person statement the other day
wherein she vehemently denied having ever authorized any of the
surveillance that took place.  The accused student and his parents
responded to that by stating that they fully accepted her statements,
and furthermore had never assumed that she had been the one who
authorized the spying.  The Vice Principal, during the issuing of her
statement of denials, did not deny having accused the student of drug
use, so I presume that did take place as claimed by the plaintiffs in
this matter.

  Here is a very recent statement from the head of the school system,
a Mr. Ebby:

We will learn from this experience, Ebby said, and implement those
changes that are necessary to better safeguard the privacy rights of
students and their families.

  From what I read, this is already an admission that some things were
mishandled at best or were potentially criminal at worst.  The school
system has suspended, with pay, the IT workers involved in the
surveillance, and has hired a New York firm to investigate the
instances of surveillance and how many times it was done.  Previously,
the school system has firmly stood its ground against any accusations
of having done anything untoward, unwarranted or having violated the
privacy rights of anyone.

  Steve


*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-10 Thread Jeff Miles

You guys seem to have a whole lot of information the rest of us don't. 
He was a troubled kid? Where'd this come from? And what's your definition? Was 
he killing cats? Also, from what's been written here, the school only looked 
when it was discovered the insurance hadn't been paid. So I assume this was 
once? I don't have any of this information. Where is it all coming from? Or is 
it all rumor?
Regardless of the circumstances, I think the school is probably in 
trouble. And on the surface, it looks like they should be.


Jeff Miles
jmile...@charter.net

Join my Mafia
http://apps.facebook.com/inthemafia/status_invite.php?from=550968726

On Mar 6, 2010, at 6:23 PM, mike wrote:

 If this was it, why wasn't he accused of stealing it?  Why did school
 officials continue to watch this kid when they knew he had it?  Why did they
 further accuse him of selling and taking drugs?  This software was clearly
 not used to track a stolen laptop, it was used to spy on a kid in his
 bedroom.
 
 On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Art Clemons artclem...@aol.com wrote:
 
 On 03/06/2010 08:27 PM, mike wrote:
 So the only crime so far is they should have told the boys and girls they
 would be watched remotely in their bedrooms?  Maybe they failed to make
 it
 clear because any sensible parent doesn't want their kids spied on by
 sick
 perverts.
 
 The situation is more complicated than you're making it out to be.  The
 software in question was activated because the laptop was not supposed
 to be removed from the school by the student since the parents had not
 given permission or paid a $55 fee for insurance for said laptop.  The
 laptop thus was missing or stolen as far as school records were
 concerned.  If a thief had actually had the laptop, would you be as
 concerned about the privacy of the thief?  I suspect not.  In some
 jurisdictions, the student could or would be prosecuted for theft in
 these circumstances.  This situation is more confused than portrayed.
 
 
 *
 **  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
 **  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
 *
 
 
 
 *
 **  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
 **  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
 *



*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-10 Thread MrMike6by9

I read this at TUAW this morning:

Remote webcam activation now disabled in software that led to controversy at
Pennsylvania school
by Mel Martin (RSS feed) on Mar 8th, 2010

The suburban Philadelphia school being investigated for spying on students
using MacBook laptops will lose the ability to turn on the built-in cameras
remotely when they update their security software.

Absolute Software, new owners of the LANrev remote administration suite
(formerly owned and developed by Pole Position GmbH), say they are going to
remove the webcam remote activation feature from the software this week.

In a note to customers today, the company said:

We know that webcam pictures are an ineffective tool in tracking down the
location of a stolen computer. Taking pictures of lawful computer users
without their permission, and without law enforcement involvement, is
contrary to Absolute's policies and is inconsistent with our existing, more
effective product offering.

Based on recent events, we have received many inquiries about TheftTrack
from customers who are concerned and who want to ensure their organizations
are not involved in a similar incident.

As a result, the webcam feature is being removed in all updated versions of
the software as of tomorrow. Current customers still have the feature, but
they are being advised by the company to get the latest update.

Meanwhile, the Philadelphia Inquirer is reporting that two I.T. employees of
the Lower Merion School District have been placed on leave while an
investigation continues.

The incident received national attention when the parents of a Harriton High
School sophomore filed a federal lawsuit on February 16, alleging that
school officials were activating the iSight cameras built into MacBook
computers while students were using the computers at home.

The school has said the cameras were only turned on to locate stolen
laptops, but several students said they saw the green camera light come on
several times on computers that had not been reported stolen.

Federal Agents are also investigating, and have asked the school for all
records relating to the incident.

The school says it has stopped using the software for accessing the webcams
remotely. Over the last two years, the district has provided MacBooks to all
2,300 high school students.


*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-09 Thread Jeff Miles

From the little I know of the case and a bit of common sense, I find 
this case pretty cut and dried. If the computer was stolen, the school had the 
right to track it. If it wasn't and the school only wanted $55 for insurance 
not paid, they had every right to track it if they knew who had it and who 
hadn't paid. But they had no right to invade that persons privacy. We have laws 
against that even for credit card companies calling a person at work and in 
other bothersome ways. We're in no brainer territory here.
If someone steals my computer (and I can figure out how to do this) I'd 
invade their privacy to find it. But I'm not going to give one to the neighbor 
and then use the ability to see if he's shagging my wife (if I had one).


Jeff Miles
jmile...@charter.net

Join my Mafia
http://apps.facebook.com/inthemafia/status_invite.php?from=550968726

On Mar 6, 2010, at 6:50 PM, phartz...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:05 PM, Tony B ton...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 What victim? What crime? Some of you are getting ahead of yourselves.
 There are no victims, and nobody has been charged with a crime. By
 your own admissions, the worst that happened here is that somebody in
 the school district failed to make it more clear that monitoring would
 be taking place. Fine, but that's no crime.
 
  The school system has already admitted that they failed to notify
 anyone outside of the school system, other than local police, that
 they were employing any sort of monitoring by way of webcams.  They
 didn't even tell the students who were using the computers.  That goes
 well beyond your suggestion that the worst that happened was that the
 school district failed to make the monitoring more clear.  They
 essentially didn't tell anybody anything.
 
  What we have here is the use of technology in a aberrant, possibly
 abusive and perhaps illegal fashion.  Parents who have failed to pony
 up a $55.00 insurance fee on a piece of equipment that has been
 foisted upon their child for school work should not be subjected to
 surveillance of their dwelling as a result.  That kid had been taking
 the computer back and forth to and from school daily, and just because
 that fee had not been paid and the student was therefore not supposed
 to be taking the computer off school property, that was no reason to
 delve into knee-jerk surreptitious spying.  Call the parents and ask,
 Does Blake have his computer?  He does?  Well, that's good.  Listen,
 I just need to remind you that his insurance fee for that computer is
 past due, and it would be best were that to be paid as soon as
 possible, okay?  Thank you.  Goodbye.  However, and as it is said, if
 the technology is available, IT WILL BE USED.  If not, how else does
 one justify its cost and existence?
 
  See what happens when technology takes the place of human contact?
 How do you like those robotic phone calls?  Automated telephone
 response systems with their endless menus and then you get cut off
 anyway?
 
  For what it is worth, the school system has put the two tech workers
 involved on paid leave.  For what?  For simply doing their job and
 following orders?  The school system claims to have ceased all webcam
 surveillance after orders to do so as issued by a Federal judge.
 Apparently the judge thinks something illegal may have been taking
 place.  The company that makes the tracking software has removed the
 camera activation feature from all future releases of its product.
 Looks like a fair amount of activity fueled by retrospect is taking
 place on various fronts.
 
  Steve
 
 
 *
 **  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
 **  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
 *



*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-09 Thread Jeff Miles

This is beginning to sound like a school IT department with way to much 
time on it's hands.


Jeff Miles
jmile...@charter.net

Join my Mafia
http://apps.facebook.com/inthemafia/status_invite.php?from=550968726

On Mar 6, 2010, at 7:19 PM, phartz...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 9:58 PM, mike xha...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 One article stated the two on paid leave had a 'private' website where they
 were storing pics taken from webcams.
 
  Yes, allegedly accessible by the local police department.  I would
 wonder why the use of a website to provide photos to the police for
 the purpose of tracking down lost and stolen computers?  First of all,
 police departments do not hunt for lost items.  They are not a lost
 and found agency.  They hunt for stolen property because it is
 assumed that a crime has taken place.
 
  Almost all of the incidents wherein cameras were activated were for
 misplaced computers, not ones that had been reported as being stolen.
 There were only 42 incidents of reported activation of laptop cameras,
 with only a handful of those related to computers reported as having
 been stolen.  A website for that?  Why not just e-mail the photos on a
 per-case basis of reported thefts?  This is truly technology run amok.
 
  Steve
 
 
 *
 **  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
 **  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
 *



*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-09 Thread phartz...@gmail.com

On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 6:21 AM, Jeff Miles jmile...@charter.net wrote:

        This is beginning to sound like a school IT department with way to 
 much time on it's hands.

  Conversely, there is this current situation in Montgomery County, MD
at Churchill High School where a student or students installed
keylogging software on computers used by teachers.  They did that in
order to obtain passwords to school system computers that they then
accessed to enhance the grades of about 60 classmates, perhaps for
money.  What do we have here?  Students interested in computer
technology for the purposes of using that knowledge for criminal
activity?  Or, was this all just a prank, and the kids were going to
'fess up when their report cards came out?  I seriously doubt that
would have happened.

  Various students who have been interviewed said that they all feel
so much pressure from both parents as well as school officials to
excel to extreme degrees that it is not surprising that some students
would resort to such behavior.

  Steve


*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-09 Thread Rev. Stewart Marshall

Not only that had not been informed of better more reliable ways to 
track lost/stolen laptops.  Lojack for computers.


Stewart


At 05:21 AM 3/9/2010, you wrote:
This is beginning to sound like a school IT department with 
way to much time on it's hands.



Jeff Miles
jmile...@charter.net

Join my Mafia
http://apps.facebook.com/inthemafia/status_invite.php?from=550968726


Rev. Stewart A. Marshall
mailto:popoz...@earthlink.net
Prince of Peace www.princeofpeaceozark.org
Ozark, AL  SL 82


*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-09 Thread Chris Dunford

 Various students who have been interviewed said that they all feel
 so much pressure from both parents as well as school officials to
 excel to extreme degrees that it is not surprising that some students
 would resort to such behavior.

Perhaps, but it doesn't explain why they allegedly lowered the grades of some 
students they didn't like.


*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-09 Thread Rev. Stewart Marshall


Depends on what standard of ethics you rely on here.

Stewart


At 06:28 AM 3/9/2010, you wrote:

  Various students who have been interviewed said that they all feel
so much pressure from both parents as well as school officials to
excel to extreme degrees that it is not surprising that some students
would resort to such behavior.

  Steve


Rev. Stewart A. Marshall
mailto:popoz...@earthlink.net
Prince of Peace www.princeofpeaceozark.org
Ozark, AL  SL 82


*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-09 Thread Art Clemons

mike wrote:

You seem to not understand that after finding who had the 'stolen' laptop
they spent zero time in telling the parents the boy had taken it without
permission. It never came up. They just called the kid in and tried to
accuse him of doing drugs. Then they had to backtrack and explain why they
were even watching kids over the cam.

I do understand what apparently happened. The fact there was poor
quality vice squad activity with the pictures still doesn't make the
original activity awful. I also note once again that right now the only
sources for the innocent candy usage are the student, the family of the
student and lawyers for the family of the student. There wasn't police
involvement.

I hate to put it this way but if the student had been taking drugs, we
would expect school officials to intervene in the same circumstances. I
am probably more concerned with privacy than many, that still doesn't
put me into a camp that makes this as awful as some on here make it.

A lot of IT departments put similar software or try to add said software
to company issued laptops and employees seem willing to sign forms
allowing the company to take reasonable means to recover said laptops.
Remember a lot of missing laptops that later get recovered just get
used by folks around the employee without telling the employee. It's a
good argument for encrypting drives with real encryption too.

I also note that according to the Philadelphia Inquirer today, there is
a former AUSA in charge of investigating what the district and its
employees did with the activated computers and how many pictures got taken.

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/local/20100309_District_hires_firm_to_probe_computer_camera_use.html

*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-09 Thread Art Clemons


mike wrote:

No, that's not right, the administrator said explicit the software was used
narrowly only to recover stolen/missing property.  His words.

  
Wait a moment, a laptop is supposed to be in school, it's not there and 
nobody has permission to remove said laptop from school.  What is the 
status of the laptop except missing?  Does that not meet both the legal 
and commonsense definitions of missing?



*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-09 Thread mike

Trouble is from what was said they knew who had it.

On Mar 9, 2010 10:58 AM, Art Clemons artclem...@aol.com wrote:

mike wrote:   No, that's not right, the administrator said explicit the
software was used  narrow...
Wait a moment, a laptop is supposed to be in school, it's not there and
nobody has permission to remove said laptop from school.  What is the status
of the laptop except missing?  Does that not meet both the legal and
commonsense definitions of missing?

* **
 List info, subscrip...


*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-09 Thread Art Clemons

On 03/09/2010 01:03 PM, mike wrote:
 Trouble is from what was said they knew who had it.


Nope, they knew after they had pictures from the webcam, not before.
Suspecting someone has something and having proof that same individual
has it are two different things and usually two different sets of
circumstances too.

It should be noted that the parents filed this suit after they too had
been informed of the possible drug usage and the record of the possible
drug usage wasn't removed from the student's record.


*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-08 Thread Jeff Miles

That's not a fair statement when it comes to the average parent. I know 
people who are of parenting age that still have to be taught how to use email. 
I can't text on a cell phone to save my life.
To you and me certain things might be common sense, but the the average 
construction worker, used car sales person, plant worker, etc. this stuff 
probably doesn't jump to mind. When many people can't figure out how to work a 
computer, the last thing you can expect is having them to know this stuff and 
how to work it out.


Jeff Miles
jmile...@charter.net

Join my Mafia
http://apps.facebook.com/inthemafia/status_invite.php?from=550968726

On Mar 4, 2010, at 9:20 AM, Tony B wrote:

 If I was dumb enough to take a free laptop from my neighbor and not wipe the
 drive before giving it to my pubescent daughter then I would sue *myself *for
 being too stupid to have procreated.
 
 
 On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 11:15 AM, mike xha...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 So your neighbor gives you a laptop...two weeks later you learn he had
 installed a remote program on the laptop and has been watching your 13 year
 old daughter in her room.  Your answer is to go yell at your daughter that
 she should have taped the cam?  Interesting.
 
 
 
 *
 **  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
 **  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
 *



*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-08 Thread Jeff Miles

Not a lawyer, but this would be true unless they were working on 
direction of the school district, or it could be argued, as an agent of the 
school district, believing they were following school district policy.
I don't know enough about the situation, but was more then one teacher 
involved? Was it ordered by the principal? Was it known throughout the 
administration? To many questions to judge on this.


Jeff Miles
jmile...@charter.net

Join my Mafia
http://apps.facebook.com/inthemafia/status_invite.php?from=550968726

On Mar 4, 2010, at 8:33 AM, tjpa wrote:

 On Mar 4, 2010, at 8:25 AM, phartz...@gmail.com wrote:
 It makes no sense to me. It's like I'm suing myself, said Jamie
 Singer, whose son and daughter attend the high school.
 
 If a delivery person robs a bank while driving their delivery route does the 
 delivery company get prosecuted?
 
 Don't sue the school district. Prosecute the people who did the deed. They 
 should not be allowed to hide behind the school district.
 
 
 *
 **  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
 **  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
 *



*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-08 Thread Art Clemons

On 03/08/2010 01:06 AM, John Duncan Yoyo wrote:
 
 The question is though is did the kid get in trouble initially for
 taking the computer home without insurance? We know he was tagged for
 the eating of illicit candies.



Actually I remind everyone that he and his parents claim that he was
eating Mike  Ike, which may well be the absolute unvarnished truth, but
note the problem!

The laptop was apparently noted as missing and possible recovery sought.
 Apparently the IP address and webcam weren't activated until someone at
the school caused the activation because it was missing.  That's one of
the reasons this case is so murky.  The district had used the same
technique to recover some stolen laptops previously.

Ironically enough it's likely that if inventories of computers without
the insurance weren't taken some of the present critics would be
bemoaning the lack of care for tax monies with said computers.  I don't
know how this case will turn out. I do note however school officials
only ended up in this tangle because for some reason said official(s)
tried to do something about what was believed to be illicit drug usage.
 It is ironic indeed!


*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-08 Thread Art Clemons

On 03/08/2010 01:28 AM, mike wrote:
 *The district says it turned on the camera in Robbins' computer because,
 since he had not paid a $55 insurance fee, he should not have been taking it
 home.

It's not likely the administrator had the recovery software activated
just because he wasn't supposed to be taking it.

 *That implies that the student had taken it home more than once and that the
 school knew it.  As in they knew who took it, and could have just phone the
 kids house.  Instead they turn the camera on and then watch long enough to
 see him snort fun-dip and accuse him of drug taking/selling...no mention of
 taking the laptop home and the 55 dollar fee.  Why not?  According to this
 reporter at least, the school admin knew when they turned it on who had the
 laptop.


Actually that's not clear at all.  In the past, some stolen laptops were
recovered with the same software.  Most likely until someone identified
the student, nobody knew where the laptop was when it was found to be
missing.  Until discovery completes, nobody but the district knows how
many times the software was used and under what circumstances.  It does
appear however that if the fee had been paid, the webcam would not have
been activated.  I also have to ask just what people in Lower Merion as
opposed to Upper Merion would be saying if the district had not taken
seriously its inventory of laptops without insurance.


*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-08 Thread mike

No, that's not right, the administrator said explicit the software was used
narrowly only to recover stolen/missing property.  His words.

On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 10:18 PM, Art Clemons artclem...@aol.com wrote:

 On 03/08/2010 01:28 AM, mike wrote:
  *The district says it turned on the camera in Robbins' computer because,
  since he had not paid a $55 insurance fee, he should not have been taking
 it
  home.

 It's not likely the administrator had the recovery software activated
 just because he wasn't supposed to be taking it.




*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

On 03/06/2010 09:23 PM, John Duncan Yoyo wrote:
 If any pictures of an underage child were taken let alone viewed they are
 likely open to prosecution for kiddie porn.  This happened in Pennsylvania
 where they prosecuted a teenage girl for taking pictures of herself and
 emailing them to her boyfriend.


I live in PA, while there are idiot DAs, there is no present claim that
pornographic pictures were taken or even available.  This isn't about
porn.  There are more ways to allegedly invade privacy than having porn
involved.


*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-07 Thread John Duncan Yoyo

On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 9:23 PM, Art Clemons artclem...@aol.com wrote:

 On 03/06/2010 09:23 PM, John Duncan Yoyo wrote:
  If any pictures of an underage child were taken let alone viewed they are
  likely open to prosecution for kiddie porn.  This happened in
 Pennsylvania
  where they prosecuted a teenage girl for taking pictures of herself and
  emailing them to her boyfriend.


 I live in PA, while there are idiot DAs, there is no present claim that
 pornographic pictures were taken or even available.  This isn't about
 porn.  There are more ways to allegedly invade privacy than having porn
 involved.

 No but the prosecutors can choose to escalate the charges if they find
anything that qualifies.  I grew up in that part of the state.  At this
point a witch hunt wouldn't surprise me.
-- 
John Duncan Yoyo
---o)


*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

On 03/06/2010 09:23 PM, mike wrote:
 If this was it, why wasn't he accused of stealing it?  Why did school
 officials continue to watch this kid when they knew he had it?  Why did they
 further accuse him of selling and taking drugs?  This software was clearly
 not used to track a stolen laptop, it was used to spy on a kid in his
 bedroom.

You don't seem to understand the difference between a justification for
activating said laptop and your claims.  If said laptop was removed
without permission, it's still missing, and we don't know that it was
possible to identify who had possession of said laptop.

I finally note that a justification for investigation doesn't
necessarily involve the possibility of criminal charges.  Do you really
want criminal charges for someone who without permission removed a
laptop assigned to that individual in school?


*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-07 Thread Rev. Stewart Marshall


At present this is a lot of he said she said type stuff.

As  stated before we are only getting sound bytes not all the legal niceties.

I am only hoping that when this thing truly plays out in the courts 
(if it does) we get to find out all the stuff that really went on.


So far there are just too may enticing snippets being released for 
maximum impact to know what truly happened.


Stewart

At 09:24 PM 3/7/2010, you wrote:

On 03/06/2010 09:23 PM, mike wrote:
 If this was it, why wasn't he accused of stealing it?  Why did school
 officials continue to watch this kid when they knew he had 
it?  Why did they

 further accuse him of selling and taking drugs?  This software was clearly
 not used to track a stolen laptop, it was used to spy on a kid in his
 bedroom.

You don't seem to understand the difference between a justification for
activating said laptop and your claims.  If said laptop was removed
without permission, it's still missing, and we don't know that it was
possible to identify who had possession of said laptop.

I finally note that a justification for investigation doesn't
necessarily involve the possibility of criminal charges.  Do you really
want criminal charges for someone who without permission removed a
laptop assigned to that individual in school?


*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*



*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-07 Thread mike

You seem to not understand that after finding who had the 'stolen' laptop
they spent zero time in telling the parents the boy had taken it without
permission.  It never came up.  They just called the kid in and tried to
accuse him of doing drugs.  Then they had to backtrack and explain why they
were even watching kids over the cam.

On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 8:24 PM, Art Clemons artclem...@aol.com wrote:

 On 03/06/2010 09:23 PM, mike wrote:
  If this was it, why wasn't he accused of stealing it?  Why did school
  officials continue to watch this kid when they knew he had it?  Why did
 they
  further accuse him of selling and taking drugs?  This software was
 clearly
  not used to track a stolen laptop, it was used to spy on a kid in his
  bedroom.

 You don't seem to understand the difference between a justification for
 activating said laptop and your claims.  If said laptop was removed
 without permission, it's still missing, and we don't know that it was
 possible to identify who had possession of said laptop.

 I finally note that a justification for investigation doesn't
 necessarily involve the possibility of criminal charges.  Do you really
 want criminal charges for someone who without permission removed a
 laptop assigned to that individual in school?


 *
 **  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
 **  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
 *



*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-07 Thread Rev. Stewart Marshall


Right now a lot of hearsay and not too many substantiating facts.

Also note this is now almost 4 months past when it happened.

 what happened between the actual incident and now tog et us to this point?

There is just too much missing to start drawing firm conclusions on everything.

Stewart



At 09:33 PM 3/7/2010, you wrote:

You seem to not understand that after finding who had the 'stolen' laptop
they spent zero time in telling the parents the boy had taken it without
permission.  It never came up.  They just called the kid in and tried to
accuse him of doing drugs.  Then they had to backtrack and explain why they
were even watching kids over the cam.



*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-07 Thread phartz...@gmail.com

On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 10:44 PM, Rev. Stewart Marshall
revsamarsh...@earthlink.net wrote:

  what happened between the actual incident and now tog et us to this point?

  Read what I have written about what took place between November 2009
and January 2010 as far as the Robbins family is concerned.  Actually,
nothing really happened and they thought the whole thing had gone
away, but it hadn't.

  Steve


*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-07 Thread phartz...@gmail.com

On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 10:33 PM, mike xha...@gmail.com wrote:

 You seem to not understand that after finding who had the 'stolen' laptop
 they spent zero time in telling the parents the boy had taken it without
 permission.  It never came up.  They just called the kid in and tried to
 accuse him of doing drugs.  Then they had to backtrack and explain why they
 were even watching kids over the cam.

  We do not know exactly what information the school provided to the
parents of the boy who was surveilled.  The parents met with school
officials back in November of 2009, presumably after that picture had
been taken of him eating candies that had been referred to as drugs by
a school administrator.  The parents claim to have left that meeting
under the assumption that the bogus drug charge had been put to rest,
I am assuming that any suspicion that their son had stolen the
computer had also been put to rest.  I also have to guess that the
$55.00 insurance fee issue was similarly settled because the boy
continued to keep and take home the computer in the aftermath.

  It was only after the parents learned in January of 2010 that the
drug use charge was still in their son's file and that the school
system was apparently unwilling to remove it from his file that they
took legal action.  I guess the parents got ticked off just enough
that they decided to make public the information about the spying that
took place along with the bogus claim of drug use.

  It also appears as though even after the surveillance of that boy
occurred back in November of 2009, the school system still did not
notify any parents or students about the potential for video
surveillance that was embedded in those computers.  That smacks me of
being either incompetence or having made a conscious decision not to
reveal that fact.  The school used the surveillance 42 times by their
count yet it still apparently never dawned on them that some
notification about that system would be in order.  Wouldn't it have
been beneficial to have made that known?  Wouldn't that have served as
a theft deterrent?  It almost seems to me as though the school systems
was more interested in experimenting and messing around with the
surveillance system than in actually using it to help prevent theft.

  Steve


*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

On 03/06/2010 10:05 PM, phartz...@gmail.com wrote:
   Technical, schmechnical.  Give the parents a call, for goodness
 sake.  That's what you do when a school fee has not been paid.  What
 do we have here, the KGB or something?  Is this the sort of behavior
 that technology can breed?
 

Did the parents even know about the policy on not removing said laptop?
 Just imagine the furor over getting a bill for a removed laptop in
those circumstances.  I find it amusing that you want workers to assume
where a laptop is, rather than investigating with technical tools.


*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-07 Thread mike

I haven't seen it, but perhaps you have..a definitive statement that the
school thought the laptop was in fact stolen?  I keep seeing vague things
like 'security was used in case it was missing or stolen', but never that in
this case they had turned it on because of that.  And again, if it was
stolen by this kid why was only the 'drugs' brought up to the parents?

On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 9:04 PM, phartz...@gmail.com phartz...@gmail.comwrote:

 On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 10:33 PM, mike xha...@gmail.com wrote:

  You seem to not understand that after finding who had the 'stolen' laptop
  they spent zero time in telling the parents the boy had taken it without
  permission.  It never came up.  They just called the kid in and tried to
  accuse him of doing drugs.  Then they had to backtrack and explain why
 they
  were even watching kids over the cam.

   We do not know exactly what information the school provided to the
 parents of the boy who was surveilled.  The parents met with school
 officials back in November of 2009, presumably after that picture had
 been taken of him eating candies that had been referred to as drugs by
 a school administrator.  The parents claim to have left that meeting
 under the assumption that the bogus drug charge had been put to rest,
 I am assuming that any suspicion that their son had stolen the
 computer had also been put to rest.  I also have to guess that the
 $55.00 insurance fee issue was similarly settled because the boy
 continued to keep and take home the computer in the aftermath.

  It was only after the parents learned in January of 2010 that the
 drug use charge was still in their son's file and that the school
 system was apparently unwilling to remove it from his file that they
 took legal action.  I guess the parents got ticked off just enough
 that they decided to make public the information about the spying that
 took place along with the bogus claim of drug use.

  It also appears as though even after the surveillance of that boy
 occurred back in November of 2009, the school system still did not
 notify any parents or students about the potential for video
 surveillance that was embedded in those computers.  That smacks me of
 being either incompetence or having made a conscious decision not to
 reveal that fact.  The school used the surveillance 42 times by their
 count yet it still apparently never dawned on them that some
 notification about that system would be in order.  Wouldn't it have
 been beneficial to have made that known?  Wouldn't that have served as
 a theft deterrent?  It almost seems to me as though the school systems
 was more interested in experimenting and messing around with the
 surveillance system than in actually using it to help prevent theft.

  Steve


 *
 **  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
 **  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
 *



*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal

2010-03-07 Thread phartz...@gmail.com

On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 11:21 PM, Art Clemons artclem...@aol.com wrote:

 The problem for your logic is that the laptop was removed without
 permission so was missing.  The laptop was supposed to be used in school
 only under the circumstances indicated unless the insurance was
 purchased.  The laptop at best thus was missing.  It was not clear when
 the surveillance began exactly where the missing laptop was.  I'll ask
 again if the laptop had been stolen, would you still term what was done
 as spying?

  Spying?  Yes, absolutely, and particularly so since no notice had
been provided that such would be the consequence for a missing
computer.  As I said earlier, you first call the parents of the
student and query them about the whereabouts of the missing
computer.  If that pans out to be unsatisfactory, you take it from
there.

  It surely must have been known that the student's computer was
supposed to remain in the school because the insurance fee had not
been paid.  Logic would tell you that the most likely scenario was
that the kid was simply taking the computer home despite the fact the
fee had not been paid.  Kids just act that way.  Surely, any high
school administrator knows that.  You act upon the most likely
scenario as opposed to getting all knee-jerk about it.

  What if a student in the school band was taking home their
instrument without having paid the insurance fee on that?  Since the
instrument would not be equipped a camera, would you call his or her
parents about it or would you send someone to the student's home and
have them sneak up to the kid's bedroom window and take a peek inside?

  Furthermore, it is not the duty of the school system to be talking
the law into their own hands.  When an expensive item ihas been
determined to have been stolen, you report that to the police and have
them take the appropriate action, not some IT geeks.  If the cops want
to get a warrant to allow them to view what the computer camera can
capture, then let them do that, and proceed accordingly.

  Steve


*
**  List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy  **
**  policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/  **
*

Re: [CGUYS] Twist in school spying scandal