Federal Judges Take a Stance Against Workplace Monitoring

parvati writes: "The NYTimes is reporting that federal judges on the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (the largest of the 12 regional circuit courts) disabled software on their office computers that monitored downloading of music, streaming video, and pornography--software that had been installed by the Washington-based Administrative Office of the Courts after a survey showed that 3-7% of the judicial computer traffic included streaming video and the like. The judges say that they are concerned about "the propriety and even the legality of monitoring Internet usage." The AOC is not pleased."

Comments

Re:AOC?

[Big Nothing]

AOC = Asian Orgazm Council

Privacy for the priveleged few only

[ever hopeful]

Who are the workers who have the luxury of privacy at work anyway? Mostly the bosses who are shielded from everyone else with their separate offices, secretaries, closed doors, etc. And the furtive sort of privacy you can imagine you might have in a cubicle, or if you stay at your desk during lunch. So if there is a right to privacy in the workplace, wouldn't it logically go way beyond net traffic? If it's a "right" it would have to be democratically allowed. Would being made to sit in an open, cubicle-less room then be a violation of "privacy"? Aren't these judges likely to catch a tiger by the tail if they "win"? Remember, the definition of "employee" centers on the existence of employer "control" over exactly how the employee conducts him/herself while on the job. We go to great lengths to euphemise the basic indentured servant status of the modern workplace, but it is what it is - organized control of people by other people for the profit of the owners. Deal with it. - M Peasley -