

Thousands of webcam images have been found in the school district being sued - obsaysditto
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/homepage/20100416_1_000s_of_Web_cam_images__suit_says.html

======
CWuestefeld
I'm glad that somebody is still tracking this story, and it hasn't just
dropped on the ground.

Too often, it seems, a news story outrages us, but the furor quickly dies
down. In the end, nobody even notices the ritual scapegoat.

A little while back, somebody proposed here
(<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1183587> ) a web app that would allow us
to follow a news story entire life. This reminds of that, and why it would be
a good idea.

~~~
redrobot5050
One reason the furor over this died down so quickly is that different stories
reported the facts differently. My friends and I all debated what had really
happened. The student believed the webcam had taken pictures of him acting
inappropriate without his knowledge or consent (and no parents were notified
of this 'feature' of school-provided laptops).

However, it was not clear in initial reports if the student had actually done
something and was spied on, or if he had taken pictures and shared them in
school. Some schools have policies where students can be disciplined for
violations off school grounds in instances of bullying or disseminating "ssext
messages" from their peers. It was not clear, from the reporting, if this was
the case.

The fact that the media is now reporting the facts, and the schools thought it
was actually a good idea to spy on high school students in their own homes,
shows a kind of unparalleled stupidity in both a legal standpoint and
technological one.

Also, considering the statistic on how many children of the ages 14-18 "sext"
one another, this software, the school's servers, the IT staff and the
administrators could all be considered to be part of a child pornography
network, if in fact any of those kids decided to "privately model" for another
student using their laptop. Aside from the civil aspect of it, I would be
contacting my state's AG to investigate whether or not any of those laws were
broken.

~~~
ErrantX
> the school's servers, the IT staff and the administrators could all be
> considered to be part of a child pornography network

No, please lets not go to that silly place.

It detracts from the real child pornography issues.

We don't need CP laws to convict these people of a crime; the crime they have
actually committed.

If the administrator was taking pictures of them nude or in sexual positions
and then storing them; i.e. with the intent of viewing them sexually, then
nail him.

But otherwise this is well covered by _voyeurism_ law. A much more appropriate
charge.

------
blantonl
where there is smoke, there is fire. Sounds to me like what initially was an
ability to view students working in school quickly digressed into illegal
abuse of the deployment. That district's insurance company must be terrified
at this point, because lawyers are going to come out of the woodwork to jump
on this one.

~~~
lallysingh
One nude photo of a student changing, and this is going to turn to a
shitstorm.

~~~
influx
If so there should be jail-time involved for the person administering this
system.

~~~
DanielStraight
The presence of a nude photo shouldn't matter. America has lost sight of
intent as a critical component in crime. The administrators of this system
_intentionally_ photographed minors in their bedrooms without their knowledge
and without any consent. What the photos show is irrelevant. The obsession
about the act over the intent is why we have highschool kids getting booked on
child pornography charges for receiving naked pictures of their classmates
while something like this hangs in the balance. This is a clear case of
criminal privacy violation and misconduct towards minors, regardless what the
pictures show.

~~~
CWuestefeld
_The presence of a nude photo shouldn't matter._

This is incorrect, because incentives are important. If we don't hold people
responsible for their actions, even when their actions are due to negligence
or incompetence, then we build a society that is intentionally negligent and
incompetent.

When (hypothetically) some teenage girl's nude photos wind up on the web, I
don't think that a "sorry, that was an accident" is going to make her feel
much better. When people are injured due to the actions of others, the injured
parties are owed some redress.

We don't want incompetents running things, so we need to make sure that they
are weeded out. Now, it may be that "oops" is a mitigating factor, but it is
in no way an excuse.

A friend of mine was doing a tax protest many years ago, handing out fliers in
front of the post office. He was arrested for this. He later sued the town and
the police officers for violating his civil rights. He won several thousand
dollars from the town, but the police officers got off. The explanation was
that it wasn't their fault because they hadn't been trained for this scenario.
Now, knowing that this is a viable excuse, our police officers have every
incentive to avoid training. If they get trained, they're liable for their
behavior, but staying ignorant is a get-out-of-jail-free card.

Edit: I may have misunderstood you. I first read this to say that a
hypothetical nude photo wouldn't be a big deal, because the school didn't mean
to do that. Maybe you're saying the opposite, that it doesn't matter if there
is NO such photo, because it should be obvious that it could easily happen.

~~~
pyre
> _Edit: I may have misunderstood you. I first read this to say that a
> hypothetical nude photo wouldn't be a big deal, because the school didn't
> mean to do that. Maybe you're saying the opposite, that it doesn't matter if
> there is NO such photo, because it should be obvious that it could easily
> happen._

I took it that GP is stating that we shouldn't _only_ consider this to be a
big deal if nude photos show up. We shouldn't _have_ to hope that the 'child
porn' card is played to have people suffer real consequences for what they did
at that school.

~~~
DanielStraight
This is correct.

Nevertheless, I am torn in how to response to CWuestefeld's point. I want to
say that it would be just as bad to obsess over intent without worrying about
act, but I'm not sure that's true.

Even in the cases presented (accidentally posting a nude photo and arresting
someone who had not committed a crime), the crime is still not just in the act
itself. The crime is also in the negligence involved. A negligent police
officer should be punished even if no one is mistakenly arrested. If someone
negligently handles nude photos (I'm not sure why you'd have them in the first
place, but let's leave that aside for now), they should be punished even if
the photos don't get leaked.

If social security numbers are leaked on a public website, those responsible
should be punished _even if no one loaded the page_. If, however, a company is
absolutely devoted to security but someone still breaks in and steals social
security numbers, the company's punishment should be less, even though the act
(social security numbers falling into the wrong hands) is less bad than the
negligent company's act (social security numbers being mishandled but never
falling into the wrong hands). I'd rather my social security number wasn't
leaked, but I'd place greater trust in a company which handled it correctly
and still got broken into than one that handled it recklessly but got lucky.

Really, I think that's the point I want to make above all: Luck should have no
bearing on the law.

~~~
CWuestefeld
I can agree with that.

I guess it boils down to people needing to act responsibly. We must each
fulfill those responsibilities that are incumbent upon us. If I'm entrusted
with those SS#s, I'd better take care of them. If I took reasonable measures
to do so but they're lost, I'm less bad then if I was irresponsible and just
lucked out.

------
imgabe
_The district has said it turned on the camera in Robbins' computer because
his family had not paid the $55 insurance fee and he was not authorized to
take the laptop home._

This is puzzling. First of all, if he didn't pay the fee, why did he even have
access to it to take it home? Secondly, if you already know where the laptop
is and who has it, what's the point of turning on the camera? (Other than to
satisfy your penchant for voyeurism)

------
ssouth
Absolutely disgusting. I'm happy this case is being treated seriously and that
(as it appears) there's the hope of action being taken against these school
administrators.

I've thought for years that parents place far too much trust in public-school
staff.

~~~
nkohari
It was a private school, wasn't it?

~~~
obsaysditto
Public school. Harriton High School in Lower Merion School District

------
cubicle67
how do you get a society where something like this is uncovered, and half of
the comments are abusing the family that uncovered it?

oh, and the past tense of shine is shone :)

~~~
Freebytes
There is a tendency in society for people to blame the victim. You hear about
rape crimes, and people ask what the girl was wearing with the idea that
somehow she was 'asking for it.' I try to view the situation from both sides
as much as possible, but I do not advocate blaming the vicitim in most
circumstances.

In this particular case, it is stupid for the school system to even implement
this policy in the first place. There are multiple issues with this other than
the spying aspect.

(1) Why is the school letting the kids use laptops in the first place? What is
wrong with desktop machines that are cheaper that stay at the school? Is there
really a significant advantage given to learning or is it worth it to the
taxpayer? I highly doubt a positive correlation exists between computer use
and higher grades.

(2) They could simply have installed other tracking software or reported the
IP address back to a server have the laptops found if stolen. They could have
required some form of collateral or payment if a student lost a laptop or if
the laptop was stolen. It does not make sense to justify such a method of
tracking when other (better) solutions exist.

(3) The system was only 'activated' 42* times, but it took thousands of
pictures? You only need one picture to identify someone. They were actively
spying on these kids.

~~~
billybob
Besides all this, why the heck do they need pictures to track a device? A
picture of a bedroom doesn't even tell you where the laptop is. A GPS reading
does, and is far less invasive (though I would still insist on the students
being notified about GPS tracking).

Their 'solution' is incompetent AND malicious.

~~~
pyre
I think they thought that they would get a photo of the thief and it would
make it easier to prosecute. (And giving that photo to the police would put
that person on their radar as well).

------
LiveTheDream
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

~~~
cperciva
Populus.

~~~
s-phi-nl
Translation: Who will guard the guards? The people.

~~~
cperciva
_Translation:_

It saddens me that this is necessary. It wasn't long ago that Latin was part
of the standard curriculum in grammar schools.

 _The people_

For clarity: This is my answer, not the answer given by Plato (who argues that
the guardians should guard themselves) or answer from Juvenal (who implicitly
takes the position that this is an impossible problem).

~~~
sketerpot
Why should Latin be part of the standard curriculum?

~~~
cperciva
Because learning Latin trains the mind in logical thought.

Because studying Latin helps people learn about the grammatical structures
which they use in their native tongue without understanding.

Because understanding Latin makes it much easier to learn any of the many
Latin-influenced languages, or even to guess at what text means without
knowing the language.

Because knowing Latin is a prerequisite for learning much of European history
from primary sources.

~~~
sketerpot
> Because learning Latin trains the mind in logical thought.

How? Is there something magical about Latin? Would other, less dead languages
have the same effect?

> Because studying Latin helps people learn about the grammatical structures
> which they use in their native tongue without understanding.

That's hardly unique to Latin.

> Because understanding Latin makes it much easier to learn any of the many
> Latin-influenced languages, or even to guess at what text means without
> knowing the language.

Why not learn another Latin-derived modern language, instead? You get some of
that same effect, _and_ you learn a language that isn't dead.

> Because knowing Latin is a prerequisite for learning much of European
> history from primary sources.

How many people are going to want to do that, ever? Consider the opportunity
cost of learning Latin for those who won't. And then, _of_ the people who will
want to read those primary sources, how many of them would benefit from being
able to read them in Latin rather than in a translation?

------
Qz
Can someone make the title a little more grammatical? It's not really a
sentence and it doesn't make sense unless you already know what it's referring
to.

~~~
jacquesm
Titles have to be 80 characters or less. Plenty of times it takes more than
that to make a title more 'grammatical', so bits are sacrificed to fit the
limit.

------
DanielBMarkham
I continue to be amazed that people are not more outraged about this. While
there is some outrage and certainly charges will be filed, in general the
public's opinion of their right to privacy and anonymity has shifted by orders
of magnitude in the last 20 years.

~~~
boyer
There are a number of facts that I can almost guarantee that anyone not
outraged probably aren't aware of - I will list only a few because anyone who
doesn't do research before posting or reading posts for opinions is kind of
hopeless.

1\. Students were required to use these laptops for their coursework - in
class and at home. No laptop - no going to class.

2\. Despite the software being designed to track stolen property. The school
district pursued a student for eating candy (drug suspicion) while is laptop
had not been stolen. The software company has come out against the school and
disabled the functionality the school used.

3\. There's a video on youtube showing a systems administrator messing with
the students on the laptops while in school (reading over their shoulders and
what not). Keep in mind these are mandatory for classes.

~~~
hga
I think the latter item (#3) is from a PBS show on another school district.
Which doesn't change the general point of "where's the outrage"?

