Slashdot Mirror
Internet Usage Records Accessible Under FOI Laws
The records in question are log files created by the schools' proxy servers of what URLs are accessed by the student body. The school district in question isn't censoring Internet access with any sort of censorware product (they use teachers to monitor what students are accessing), and the parent would like to prove that the students are accessing porn sites. I do not believe it is an invasion of privacy to access these records; if there was an invasion of privacy, it occurred when the school district collected the records on their students, not when someone else requested to see them.
Some comments of mine that didn't make it into the Times article: I hope that this situation casts some light on Internet usage at public facilities. Many, many Internet services are set up to create detailed log files by default -- proxy servers, Web servers, various login mechanisms and authentication mechanisms, etc. These records are being collected, and they are just lying around on machines or tape backups here and there, and they are, if the entity that collected them is a public entity, public records accessible under FOI laws. If you want to prove that your local school/library shouldn't be censoring the Internet, request the records. (I'll help! E-mail me.) If you want to prove that your local school/library should be censoring the Internet, well, I won't help, but I still support your right to get access to public files.
And while this situation is about records collected by public entities, the same records are routinely collected by private entities as well. Is your Web access going through a proxy server at your ISP? (The answer is more likely to be "yes" than "no," by the way -- a proxy can be installed that is transparent to the end-user.) Then your ISP is collecting detailed records of every single URL you access through their service. How long are these records being retained? Who is the ISP selling them to? Do you know?
I cannot tell you why you should expect privacy in the US when accessing the net via public ressources, but I can tell you why you should expect such privacy in Germany.
In Germany, the supreme court has ruled that if a basic right can only be excercised in a way that the person exercising this right would feel monitored, threatened or otherwise limited while exercising that particular basic right in such a way that that person may decide not to exercise that basic right at all, then this is identical to an illegal takeway of such a basic right and therefore illegal.
In the above library scenario that would mean: If you are using a public information terminal to exercise your right as an adult to browse arbitrary information sources and you must fear that your browsing history is being monitored and may perhaps be used against you, than this would be an illecal takeway of your basic right to free and unhindered access to public information. It may be okay or even necessary to monitor the internet connection of minors (judges are still out on this issue in Germany), but it is clear illegal to do such a thing on a public terminal when an adult is using that terminal.
© Copyright 2000 Kristian Köhntopp
The plaintiff has no direct interest other than a vague legal interest public policy, because, and this is important to understand, his own children are not in the public schools, are not the subject of this inquiry. The articles state that the plaintiffs own children are enrolled in PRIVATE school which specifically is immune from a legal challenge like this. So turnabout in this case is NOT fair play. We could not for example have the access records for his children made public because they are enrolled in private school and it is not a public policy issue.
So in the end this where law and public policy are mismatched to the Net? Why you ask? Well in this case it's not much different that protesting outside of a family planning clinic. the law states that protests have to be a certain distance from the front door so that people going are not only physically prohibited but also that they are not subject to undue emotional stress, verbal abuse, etc. In the case here there is no physical separation so what we have in effect is a protest or vigil that has a chilling effect on using a facility without the protection from figuratively blocking the door.
So the question you have to ask yourself is, is this challenge really about filtering software or is this challenge about using the facility at all. It would be interesting from a legal perspective to see whether this gentleman could be successfully prosecuted if he ever published and identifiable information on minors who access the Net. That is, let's say he is collecting this information in order to pressure the school or the students by publishing the names or addresses of sites they visit. If he refers to any identifaible attribute of a minors access, say, first initial last name could he be prosecuted under a law that bars divulging any information about minors without their guardians' consent?
Thing the first: The guy's children are _not at that school_, and he is requesting the log files for all of the children in the school. He does not have responsibility for any of those kids.
Thing the second: You might have the legal right to go through your daughter's drawers. But I'm not convinced that you have the moral right. Why shouldn't she have the same right to privacy as you? I don't believe your "responsibility" for someone's upbringing suddenly gives you the right to go through their personal stuff.
Wow. Free internet usage stats on a very specific and impressionable demographic. Advertisers are going to eat this up.