Quote:
Originally Posted by UGAalum94
Can you say for sure what would have been in the Terms of Use contract? I have no idea, but it's kind of surprising to me that you see it as being so absolute even without knowing what they might have agreed to or what technology they were using. I mean, theoretically, the school could be paying for everyone to have 3G/mobile broadband/whatever to get around the limitations of some kids not having internet access at home. Or more likely that they tried to set up the terms of use so that they attempted to control how the kids would use the computers at home, even off network, and reserved the right to monitor the use.
The fact that one family thinks they can win the lawsuit indicates that they don't think they gave permission for the level of monitoring they think the school was actually using, but I don't automatically assume their claims match reality. Who knows what was really happening?
I don't think issuing computers is common. I think the schools gain being able assume a baseline of technology to then use as support for all classroom assignments. I suspect that there's academic discipline specific software they can use, as well as whatever we'd think of as almost necessary like the basic Microsoft or Open office stuff. It would take the kind of technology that you could use to a new level because you could assume kids could finish stuff at home rather than limiting the work to only what could be completed at home. You could also go to DVD or CD textbooks, internet supplements etc.
My guess is that in addition to the districts that are super affluent and just pay it out of local funds (I think that link from the district at the bottom of my previous post gives the cost in this district), there are other districts or individual schools who do a great job pursuing and using various grants. At least a decade ago at one of our local high schools, the students in one of the AP science classes all got laptops as part of a grant. (I think they just used them for the year and returned, rather than being issued for all of high school.)
But no matter how they are funded, I bet students are issued laptops in fewer than 10% of high schools nationwide.
As far as this particular case, the district claims the software only took still images of the user or the screen in cases when the computer had been reported as lost or stolen (eta: also "missing" what's the difference between a lost computer and a missing computer?)
There's no telling what could end up in the background of the still photo of the user, I suppose, but the whole situation is a little less creepy than the random audio and video webcam monitoring most of us were probably assuming based on the lawsuit.
(Assuming the district is being truthful, just knowing that the kid would have reported the laptop missing* before the software was engaged reduced the creep-factor massively as far I'm concerned. I don't have that much concern about the privacy of someone who stole the laptop or elects to use someone else's reported as lost .)
The district also indicates they have records of the circumstances when the ability was used, and that the claims about the assistant principal, who wouldn't have had access to the software, are incorrect.
Certainly, I have a problem with taping or photographing kids and their families without their knowledge, but it will be interesting to see how the suit plays out.
*re-reading the district's letter, I'm not sure that the kid would have had to report it. They spell out that they used it in cases when students have loaner computers that they took off campus without permission.
|
Was watching a story about this on CNN today, and it sounds like the school/district is lying, or doesn't know what is happening. The IT guys/gals had access to the software, and say they would only turn on the cameras when a computer had been reported missing, stolen or lost. But this student never reported his computer missing, stolen or lost. It seems too-coincidental to me that this administrator was provided with an image (apparently provided by the IT guys/gals, who they say are the only ones with access to the images) taken of this kid in his bedroom doing something they thought was illegal...at that very moment. Turns out he wasn't doing drugs, as they thought, but he WAS eating Mike & Ikes. The school is denying that the boy was shown any photos, but c'mon, how else would the kid even know about the software?
As part of the segment they had a professor of media law on, and he was commenting about how this is a pretty slam-dunk case for the filers. Not only will they likely win their civil suit, but now the FBI is investigating! As a government institution, the school is prohibited from illegal search (and obtaining anything gathered from an illegal search) - they must have a warrant, which would not be granted to a school, anyway. The FBI has apparently obtained images/data/who-knows-what-else from the school and is looking through it for evidence of constitutional rights violations, invasion of privacy (child pornography, peeping Tom-type stuff), etc. violations.
If you ask me, my gut suspicion is that this school district just decided that if they were providing laptops to students, they could monitor them at all times to see how they were being used. That included recording usage of the Webcam to make sure the students weren't abusing them. What they didn't think about (DUH!) was that they would catch kids doing things with the Webcams that they have a perfect right to do in their homes without being spied on. Not illegal stuff...just private stuff. I bet they didn't run this specific software and how it was going to be used by the legal team of the district. It is also possible that they have a pervert or two in the IT department who get their kicks watching the recorded vids of students in various states of undress and doing whatever else teenagers do.
The reason I doubt the agreement covered the Webcam recording specifically, at least in this detail? I'm assuming the parents in this super wealthy district are educated and don't just unquestionably do whatever the school tells them to do. I went to school in a district like this, and we had a hell of a lot of lawyers, businessmen, etc. as parents who sure didn't just go along for a ride. If there had been anything too hinky in an agreement like this, there's no way they would have signed it - they would have just bought their kid their own computer. This is just a school...and from experience we all know that there are plenty of h.s. teachers and administrators that are bumbling fools. When I do have kids I'll be darned if I just sit down and shut up if my kids' school ever tried to do something illegal or highly inappropriate to them.