Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Has it never occurred to anyone to put a piece of electrical tape over the damn camera?

Not that that makes it okay for anyone to be spying on you this way, but it might help a bit.

---

Quote:

---

Has it never occurred to anyone to put a piece of electrical tape over the damn camera?

Not that that makes it okay for anyone to be spying on you this way, but it might help a bit.

---

Quote:

---

Tennessee school adminstrators sued for videotaping naked girls in locker room

In 2002, the Overton County (Tenn.) School Board approved a plan to install video surveillance equipment throughout Livingston Middle School (LMS). The school board ordered the director of schools, William Needham, to oversee the project. Needham, in turn, assigned the job to LMS principal Melinda Beaty, who delegated the job to assistant principal Robert Jolley.

In July 2002, Jolley had cameras installed throughout the school in areas facing exterior doors, in hallways leading to exterior doors, and in the boys' and girls' locker rooms. The images captured by the cameras were transmitted to a computer in Jolley's office, and displayed and stored on the computer's hard drive. In September 2002, Jolley discovered that the locker room cameras were videotaping areas in which students routinely dressed for athletic activities and immediately notified Beaty of the situation. No action, however, was taken to remove the cameras until January 2003.

When the videotaping was discovered, a group of parents filed suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the school board, Needham, Beaty and Jolley. In their suit, the parents alleged that school officials violated the students' constitutional right to privacy by installing and operating video surveillance equipment in the boys' and girls' locker rooms and by viewing and retaining the recorded images.

School officials moved for summary judgment on the grounds of qualified immunity, under which public officials are entitled to be dismissed from a lawsuit if they can show that they did not violate any federal statutory or constitutional rights that were "clearly established" at the time of the alleged misconduct. The public policy behind qualified immunity is that if government officials were not sometimes given a pass for violating a citizen's constitutional rights, officials would be undesirably inhibited in exercising their duties for fear of personal liability if they made a mistake that injured someone.

In determining whether school officials were entitled to qualified immunity, the Sixth Circuit Court started by reviewing whether the students' Fourth Amendment guarantee against unreasonable searches encompassed the right not to be videotaped while dressing and undressing in school locker rooms. In ruling that such a right was protected, the court held that a search is justified only when there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that it will garner evidence that a student has violated or is violating the law or school rules, or is in imminent danger of injury on school premises.

Since the stated purpose of setting up video surveillance equipment throughout LMS was for the sake of improving security, the court ruled that the installation of cameras throughout the school in areas facing exterior doors and in hallways leading to exterior doors was appropriate.

As for whether videotaping in the locker rooms was permissible, the court held that the measures adopted must be reasonably related to the objectives of the search. The court thus had to balance the scope and manner in which the search was conducted in light of the students' reasonable expectations of privacy, the nature of the intrusion and the severity of school officials' need in enacting such policies — including, in particular, any history of injurious behavior that could reasonably suggest the need for the challenged intrusion.

Applying this balancing test, the court ruled that even though students have a diminished overall expectation of privacy, this does not mean that a student's expectation of privacy is nonexistent. The students using the LMS locker rooms, the court ruled, retained a significant privacy interest in their unclothed bodies and could reasonably expect that no one would videotape them without their knowledge while they changed their clothes for an athletic activity. As for the nature of the intrusion, the court ruled that video surveillance, and the recording and storing of those images, was inherently intrusive.

As for the governmental interest — concern that school safety measures should be enhanced, and whether, given that concern, the intrusion was reasonable — the court ruled that the installation and operation of the cameras in locker rooms was unreasonable. The cameras, the court ruled, did nothing to promote the claimed policy goal of ensuring improved school security, especially when there was no history of any security threat in the locker rooms.

Having determined that the students' constitutional rights were violated, the court next examined whether the students' rights were clearly established at the time the cameras were installed. In ruling that they were, the court held that some personal liberties are so fundamental to human dignity as to need no specific constitutional explication in order to ensure their protection against government invasion. Surreptitiously videotaping students in various states of undress, the court held, is plainly one such right. A person of ordinary common sense, the court found, to say nothing of professional school administrators, would know without need for specific instruction from a federal court that teenagers have an inherent personal dignity, a sense of decency and self-respect, and a sensitivity about their bodily privacy that are at the core of their personal liberty.

As a result of the Sixth Circuit Court's decision that the plaintiffs adequately alleged a Fourth Amendment violation of the students' constitutional right to privacy, those school officials directly involved in the decision to install cameras and responsible for determining their locations (Beaty and Jolley) were found not to be entitled to qualified immunity. Since there was no indication that members of the school board or the director of schools were aware of the locker room videotaping, the court found that they were immune from damages.

With all the concern these days over student safety, the court's decision in Brannum is important because it clearly reaffirms that even though students may have a diminished expectation of privacy when they walk through the school doors, they still have some expectations of privacy. It is therefore essential that school administrators carefully think about whether the intended purpose of any new or existing program or policy that intrudes on a student's privacy expectation is justifiable. If it is, school administrators must also ask themselves whether the intrusion is reasonably related in scope to the circumstances that justified the search. If the answer to either question is no, the qualified immunity statute will not protect school administrators from legal liability.

Attorney John T. Wolohan (jwolohan@ithaca.edu) is a professor of sports law and chair of the Sport Management & Media department at Ithaca College, where Xinxian Zou (of Beijing Sport University) is a visiting professor of sport management.

http://www.athleticbusiness.com/articles/article.aspx?articleid=1820&z
oneid=25

Brannum v. Overton County School Board, 516 F.3d 489 (6th Cir. 2008)
http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/08a0083p-06.pdf

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by piratenews:
It's 1984 all over again.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by piratenews:

According to the lawsuit, the kids are also punished for simply doing "privacy tricks" like that, or using proxy servers like Proxify.com.

---

Quote:

---

When I was a kid....

---

Quote:

---

But at least the pedophiles can now watch the kids undress in the comfort of their own homes. That's progress!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Storymark:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by piratenews:

According to the lawsuit, the kids are also punished for simply doing "privacy tricks" like that, or using proxy servers like Proxify.com.

---

Which is generally spelled out in the agreement they sign to use the computers. Boo-effin-hoo.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by piratenews:
It's 1984 all over again.

---

If only...

Ronald Reagan, 49 States, 525 electoral votes.
Walterrack Mondalebama, 1 State (by 3700 votes) + DC, 10 electoral votes.

Desmund Tutu got the Nobel Peace Prize for his "role as a unifying leader figure in the campaign to resolve the problem of apartheid in South Africa."

---

Quote:

---

The UK agency in charge of IT in UK schools has insisted there is no chance of the government's free laptops program exposing the bedroom activities of British students.

The calming words for British parents comes after a US school district was sued for allegedly spying on a student in his bedroom via the webcam on his school supplied laptop.

The proud boast of Lower Merrion School District in Philadelphia is that it gives every one of their 1,800 high-schoolers laptop computers, to "ensure that all students have 24/7 access to school-based resources."

The catch – which isn’t even mentioned in the small print – is that whilst pupils are watching their laptops, their school may be watching them. This rather sinister twist to the tale came to light when the parents of student Blake Robbins were told by an official of Harriton High School last November that their son had been involved in "improper behavior in his home."

There are no further details of what this improper behaviour might constitute – and readers must draw their own conclusions as to the sort of behaviour a teenage school student might indulge in, if left alone in his bedroom with a PC.

However, what startled and then outraged Blake’s parents was the evidence provided: a photo of their son engaged in the "improper behaviour" cited, taken not on any friend’s camera – but by the webcam on the free school laptop.

Subsequent investigation revealed that this webcam could be – and in this case, was – activated remotely by persons working for the school.

According to the Robbins family, an assistant principal at Harriton High, Lindy Matsko, confirmed that the school district "in fact has the ability to remotely activate the Webcam contained in a student's personal laptop computer issued by the school district at any time it chose, and to view and capture whatever images were in front of the Webcam."

The Robbins family have reacted by talking to their lawyers – and this week they issued suit (pdf) against the school district, its board of governors, and Christopher McGinley, the Superintendent of the district.

They allege a veritable shopping list of wrongdoing, including not only breaches of the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution, but also the Electronic Communication Privacy Act, the Computer Fraud Abuse Act, the Stored Communications Act, s1983 of the Civil Rights Act, the Pennsylvania Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Act, as well as Pennsylvania common law.

The school district has today responded robustly, claiming that the laptops come with webcam pre-installed and a tracking facility that would be used in case a laptop was stolen. They state: "The tracking-security feature was limited to taking a still image of the operator and the operator's screen. This feature has only been used for the limited purpose of locating a lost, stolen or missing laptop. The District has not used the tracking feature or web cam for any other purpose or in any other manner whatsoever."

However, this feature has now been de-activated and they do not envisage reactivating it without permission from students and parents.

So could this happen in the UK? We asked BECTA - the government agency leading the national drive to spread technology into education for their views. Their response was a categoric no.

According to a spokeswoman for BECTA, families apply for funding for a laptop through the Home Access Initiative. Individual schools do not know which families have obtained PCs – and the initiative is about providing funding for families to go out and obtain their own PC, rather than the provision of PCs through a central state provider.

In other words: it couldn’t happen here.

Nonetheless, the story is a salutary warning to all those happily downloading helpful educational packages at home. If you don’t know the provenance of a site, you cannot be 100% sure what you are getting. Even when dealing with officialdom, the message from today’s episode seems to be that you should stay on your guard at all times.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/02/19/school_laptop_spy_row/

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Storymark:
Which is generally spelled out in the agreement they sign to use the computers. Boo-effin-hoo.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by piratenews:
In 1980 Reagan/Bush won by treason in Iran-Contra, by paying Iran to raid the US embassy, kidnap the hostages, and refuse to release them until the exact minute Reagan/Bush were inaugurated, plus Lt Col Oliver North sabotaged President Carter's military rescue team, so they all crashed and burned in a desert sand storm. Then Bush's cousin John Hinkley Jr (allegedly) shot Reagan, making Bush Sr president 8 years early.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Why, "Hero", that sounds almost as preposterous as the "Obama is a socialist" crazytalk your boys have been throwing around at CPAC and elsewhere!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Storymark:
Which is generally spelled out in the agreement they sign to use the computers. Boo-effin-hoo.

---

An agreement under duress which is legally invalid for the same reason that allows shitheels to get away with these kind of abuses - cause they're not legally adults, nor are they, or anyone else, allowed to sign away their human rights.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by piratenews:

Kids are below the age of consent to contracts. Contract Law 101.

---

Quote:

---

Electronic Frontier Foundation Chief Council Kevin Bankston:"private schools or employers can ask you to sign away your right to privacy, but not a government entity like a public school. “To condition one’s receipt of government benefits on your surrendering a constitutional right is itself unconstitutional.”

---

Quote:

---

But that doesn't mean they should get free reign to do whatever they like with the equipment.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Why, "Hero", that sounds almost as preposterous as the "Obama is a socialist" crazytalk your boys have been throwing around at CPAC and elsewhere!

---

Obama is not a socialist...his policies are socialist, but he is merely a liberal intellectual elitist who is proving to be politically and professionally out of his depth.

---

Quote:

---

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Firstoff, you *can not* sign away a Constitutional Right, did you happen to forget that little bit about "Supreme Law of the Land" ?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

Firstoff, you *can not* sign away a Constitutional Right, did you happen to forget that little bit about "Supreme Law of the Land" ?

---

Actually you can waive your rights, but the waiver must be "knowing" and "voluntary".

Parents can waive the rights of their children.

Children have Constitutional rights...famous line from the Supreme Court "the Consitution does not stop at the schoolhouse gate". However they cannot exercise their rights absent parental consent. For example, a child cannot file a lawsuit, the parent files the suit on the child's behalf (noting for the record that their are limited circumstances that allow others to act 'in loco parentis' usually through an appointed child's advocate or agreement such as a school being authorized to arrange for emergency medical treatment on a field trip when the parent cannot be contacted in a reasonable time all of which go to the idea that a child cannot exercise their Constitutional rights without adult supervision).

---

Quote:

---

Electronic Frontier Foundation Chief Council Kevin Bankston:"private schools or employers can ask you to sign away your right to privacy, but not a government entity like a public school. “To condition one’s receipt of government benefits on your surrendering a constitutional right is itself unconstitutional.”

---

Quote:

---

"The Right of the Citizen to travel upon public highways by automobile is not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but the common Right which he has under his Right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, under Constitutional guarantee."
-II Am.Jur. (1st) Constitutional Law, Sect.329

"The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime."
-Miller v. US, 230 F 486, 489

"There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of this exercise of constitutional Rights."
-Snerer vs. Cullen, 481 F. 946

"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them."
-Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 US 436, 491

"I’ll burn your house down, set your dog on fire and there won’t be a member of your family left, do you understand me? I won’t hire it done, I will do it myself! Do you understand me?”
-Blount County sheriff James Berrong, United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit, Nuchols v. Berrong, No. 04-5645, July 11, 2005
http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0586n-06.pdf

"In Hurricane Katrina's chaotic aftermath, police shot six people – killing two – as they crossed a bridge in search of food. As victims' relatives watched from the courtroom gallery, a retired lieutenant who supervised the department's probe of the shootings pleaded guilty to orchestrating a cover-up to conceal that police gunned down unarmed civilians. Michael Lohman, a 21-year veteran of the force, pleaded guilty to a charge of conspiracy to obstruct justice. Prosecutors said Lohman and other unidentified officers conspired to fabricate witness statements, falsify reports of the incident and plant a gun in an attempt to make it appear the killings were justified. The shootings happened on Sept. 4, 2005, six days after the storm smashed levees and flooded 80 percent of the city. Survivors have said the officers fired at unarmed people who were crossing to get food at a grocery store."
-Huffington Post, Ex-Cop Pleads Guilty In Hurricane Katrina Killing Probe: 2 Shot, Killed On Danziger Bridge, 24 Feb 2010
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/24/excop-pleads-guilty-in-hu_n_4
75781.html

COP. 2. to steal; filch. 3. to buy (narcotics).
-Random House Unabridged Dictionary 2006

"Govt control of communications and transportation."
-Communist Manifesto, 6th Plank

---

Quote:

---

Children have Constitutional rights...famous line from the Supreme Court "the Consitution does not stop at the schoolhouse gate". However they cannot exercise their rights absent parental consent. For example, a child cannot file a lawsuit, the parent files the suit on the child's behalf (noting for the record that their are limited circumstances that allow others to act 'in loco parentis' usually through an appointed child's advocate or agreement such as a school being authorized to arrange for emergency medical treatment on a field trip when the parent cannot be contacted in a reasonable time all of which go to the idea that a child cannot exercise their Constitutional rights without adult supervision).

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:




"Hero", I have never respected you. I may have to bring your quote about "intellegence" [sic] back as my signature if you're going to keep Chris's quote as yours. ;)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

(We're workin on that, Byte.)

Formenting Dissent:

Man, you just can't buy satisfaction like this...

That horrible school my niece goes to sometime in the recent past discovered who her uncle is, prolly due to her telling them in a fit of rage I suspect, and ever since they've treated her with a bit more respect and a lot less bullshit as continuing to do so risks provoking the wrath of her "Faery Godfather" as she puts it.

Now, amusing that it is to see my perception of CCW reinforced that way even if your "weapon" is a purple Firefly...
http://www.fireflymobile.com/

I've generally not meddled, for which I am sure they're quite thankful since my last bit of meddling was the memorable student government/dress code disaster and that ain't by no means been forgotten.

I *DO* have issues with their surveillence though, and they were apparently plotting a similar laptop program, no doubt with lanrev or something similar.

Well, her homeroom has eighteen kids in it, and this particular homeroom teacher has a thing against candy with the usual "unless you brought enough for everybody" line of tripe.

So, while digging through the mess in this thread, I got a wild hair and shipped her nineteen boxes of Mike & Ike candy...
(heh heh heh)

So when the homeroom teacher calls her on munching it in class, undaunted, she pulls out the other eighteen boxes, and passes them around - mind you this stupid laptop incident has been the talk of her school for days now.

The teacher takes a look at the box, does a doubletake, and yells THAT IS NOT FUNNY!

The students disagreed, passionately, all but rolling out of their chairs.

And now I have a rather unhappy sounding message from the principal in my voicemail, oh boy, oh joy, accusing me of formenting disrespect for authority, school policy, etc etc...

That's gonna be a fun phone call tomorrow, I think.
Really though, what it amounts to is a shot across the bow in stern warning that such antics won't fly so well, and I wanted them to KNOW it.

But it *was* bloody hilarious, yeah.

-F

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Bytemite:
Cheez-wiz, they're about to throw a hissy over CANDY? And call relatives over not obeying an arbitrary UNOFFICIAL class room rule?

I mean, she met the letter of the law of that stupid request. Are they that bureaucratic, that CONTROLLING that they would obsess over the spirit of the law in the TINIEST of infractions, when the rule is so poorly defined?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:
He only does it to embarrass me in my moment of bi-partisan weakness, I conjure.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero:

Actually I only do it to to remind you that I'm right and that deep down, you know I'm right, you want me to be right, you need me to be right.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:
He only does it to embarrass me in my moment of bi-partisan weakness, I conjure.

---

Actually I only do it to to remind you that I'm right and that deep down, you know I'm right, you want me to be right, you need me to be right.

My being right gives you the freedom to engage in your liberal fantasy.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:
He only does it to embarrass me in my moment of bi-partisan weakness, I conjure.

---

Actually I only do it to to remind you that I'm right and that deep down, you know I'm right, you want me to be right, you need me to be right.

My being right gives you the freedom to engage in your liberal fantasy.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:
He only does it to embarrass me in my moment of bi-partisan weakness, I conjure.

---

Actually I only do it to to remind you that I'm right and that deep down, you know I'm right, you want me to be right, you need me to be right.

My being right gives you the freedom to engage in your liberal fantasy.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURAPT0R:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:
He only does it to embarrass me in my moment of bi-partisan weakness, I conjure.

---

Actually I only do it to to remind you that I'm right and that deep down, you know I'm right, you want me to be right, you need me to be right.

My being right gives you the freedom to engage in your liberal fantasy.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.

---

Hero, why do you feel the need to be right, to have others acknolodge you to be right

Did someone in your past not treat you well, ignore you, or not acknowlege you ?


You can be a good person without being right

Before you try to get respect here you need to respect yourself





Bones: "Don't 'rawr' her!"
Booth: "What? she'rawred' me first.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
School used laptop webcams to spy on kids at home





***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURAPT0R:
Hero, why do you feel the need to be right, to have others acknolodge you to be right

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Bytemite:
Okay, either you're just messing with Kwicko and Chris right back, or you're letting their teasing get to you, Hero.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Bytemite:
Okay, either you're just messing with Kwicko and Chris right back, or you're letting their teasing get to you, Hero.

---

Didn't even notice the teasing. Heard a lot of bitching, whining, and crazytalk. No teasing...

Funny thing is I'm not messing with them. They know I'm right but are rarely able to muster the intellectual honosty to admit to themselves that which they know in their hearts to be good and true. Thus whatever anger and frustration they feel is self-inflicted.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.

---