Aaron Computer Rental Firm Spies On Users

An anonymous reader writes with word from Yahoo news of a lawsuit "filed on behalf of a Wyoming couple who said they learned about the PC Rental Agent 'device and/or software' inside the computer they rented last year when an Aaron's Inc. store manager in Casper came to their home on Dec. 22. The manager tried to repossess the computer because he mistakenly believed the couple hadn't finished paying for it, the couple said. Brian Byrd, 26, said the manager showed him a picture of Byrd using the computer — taken by the computer's webcam. The image was shot with the help of spying software, which the lawsuit contends is made by North East, Pa.-based Designerware LLC and is installed on all Aaron's rental computers."

Comments

Whoops

[bfmorgan]

These stupid companies think they can treat their customers like children and in the process shoot themselves in the foot.

Re:Whoops

[MoonBuggy]

These stupid companies think they can treat their customers like children and very occasionally they don't get away with it.

FTFY.

Re:Whoops

[PhreakOfTime]

Well, in this case they are right. This guy has the math skills of a child. If he's lucky. Have you ever worked out the costs of that? Some of the rental ones around here end up being over 4X the price of outright buying it, over just 15 months of payments.

He shouldn't be allowed to sign a contract that involves math in any way whatsoever.

Re:Whoops

[tripleevenfall]

Well, I'm guessing people who get computers at Aarons, (or Rent-A-Center, etc.) aren't the most likely to notice spyware either.

Re:Whoops

[dragonturtle69]

Or maybe it just proves, further, that the poor get screwed.

If you have $1,000, you can buy that laptop you didn't plan for, and so didn't save for, but would be really useful now that you are starting higher education. On the other hand, if your income dictates a 12 month period of saving to get that $1,000, chances are that your window of opportunity for schooling has closed before you have the hardware.

Enter the rent-to-own industry, giving you long term low monthly payments, with what amounts to incredible interest rates. The payday advance places are the same. If you make good money, you'll never fell their sting. If you make really good money, you'll never pay interest period, just handling fees.

And now they have, if the story is true, real spyware. What type of dirtbag, including the school "officials" reported a few months back using the webcams on student laptops, spies on someone in this manner?

Re:Whoops

[PCM2]

If you have $1,000, you can buy that laptop you didn't plan for, and so didn't save for, but would be really useful now that you are starting higher education. On the other hand, if your income dictates a 12 month period of saving to get that $1,000, chances are that your window of opportunity for schooling has closed before you have the hardware.

So what you're saying is, maybe all those people who tell you that you should never, ever buy anything on credit (because credit is evil and you should always buy everything with cash), should get a crash course on something called "opportunity cost"? It's not as if it's hard for a student to get a credit card.

Re:Whoops

[avgjoe62]

Funny. If you read TFA, you'll see that the couple in question had paid off the computer and now owned it outright. The store manager was mistakenly trying to repossess the computer and that revealed the spyware to them. So, obviously, they could afford the contract. Nothing clear about it.

The point of the article is not poor people make bad decision, get computer repossessed. It was about a company still having spyware on a computer that was owned by their former customers.

Re:Whoops

[Xtravar]

I put tape over my work laptop's webcam. A little paranoid... perhaps... but it makes me feel better.

Re:Whoops

[d6]

That has been my habit ever since cams started showing up in every single screen/laptop I buy.
Nothing wrong with covering a cam you are not going to use and plenty right about it if your shit gets rooted.

Re:Whoops

[hedwards]

$1000? If you're that poor there are plenty of computers out there that are more cost effective. My dad is still running a computer he got a couple years back for $400 and it seems to be doing just fine. When it gets too slow for use, I'll just upgrade it to Linux and he'll likely be happy for a couple more years after that.

$1000 is justifiable for some people, but if you're having to buy through this sort of service you'd definitely be better off paying less and buying outright.

Re:Whoops

[dgatwood]

Opportunity cost doesn't really play into it. You can always use computer labs at your school. A laptop is a low-ticket, nice-to-have item, which mean it should never, ever be purchased on credit.

The average savings account in the U.S. contains somewhere on the order $20,000. Therefore, if you're buying anything on credit that costs more than an order of magnitude less than that, you are basically declaring yourself to be poor, complete with a giant, flashing neon sign. Because the working poor are more likely to default on loans, they get higher rates. The smaller the line of credit, the worse you get screwed. As a result, the people who can least afford credit are taken advantage of the most.

Therefore, in general, unless what you are buying costs... I don't know, say 25% of the U.S. median annual income (about $12,500), you should not even consider buying it on credit. Save your money and pay cash. (One might make an exception for "cash back" credit cards, but only if you religiously pay them off at the end of every month.)

Re:Whoops

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

You had plywood? I had to steal napkins from the dining hall, chew them into pulp and then place a layer of pulp underneath my hard, threadbare pallet, so that my uneasy tossing and turning would press it against the concrete floor and produce enough medium-density fiberboard to support my 8086.

Re:Whoops

[Arcady13]

The average savings account is $20,000? I don't know anyone with more than $5000 in savings, and the average people in the US save per year is less than $500.

That said, these rental places should be avoided like the plague. At least use a low-interest credit card if you must buy on credit.

Re:Whoops

[bipbop]

Your name isn't Dave, is it?

Re:Whoops

[hairyfeet]

Or maybe it just shows the laws in this country allow the poor to be assraped at will? My GF before I met her ended up having to get a rent to own PC after losing damned near everything but the clothes on her back in a fire. Not only did they royally rip her off on the payments but when she brought it in for a cleaning, which was part of the agreement they ripped off some of the parts and didn't even take a can of fricking air to it!

Soon after we had started dating she asked me to look at it while she was cooking supper (I'm used to it, we PC repairmen are like plumbers that way) and I take one look at the specs VS what it says on the label and I knew she'd been had. Sure enough she called the rent a center the next day and they basically told her "yeah well try to prove it. Sue us and see how far you get".

These assholes make fricking used car salesman look like paragons of honor. They KNOW these poor folks don't know what PCs cost or what is a good chip VS a bad chip, so they gouge the living hell out of them and then on top rip them off any other way they can! I thought the guys at Worst Buy were bad, but at least the guys I knew there were only sniffing around for free porn and MP3s to copy, these rent a ripoffs as I call them are true scum of the earth! And didn't we have laws against usury and outrageous interests rates? WTF happened to those?

That is why you should tell your friends and relatives, especially those that are poor or have poor kinfolk, talk to your local mom&pop shop. We're decent folks and we try our damnedest not to cause someone pain in the wallet. Hell I got three of them right now that is paying me my labor costs at $10-$30 a paycheck, simply because they couldn't afford parts and labor at once, so I found them the cheapest kit deals i could find and let them just pay for the parts and pay my labor as they could, interest free. I'd rather get paid for my time in dribs and drabs than see someone get assraped at these rent a ripoffs. Besides I've found you treat folks right the referrals will keep you busy. These leeches are frankly a blight, no different that those check cashing shysters.

Re:Whoops

[jrumney]

Or perhaps the problem will be better solved by giving them easier access to credit - from reputable sources such as banks that don't charge ursurous amounts of interest, coupled with sound financial advice designed to prevent them getting into a debt spiral as a result of trying to give their children a chance to get out of the poverty trap.

Re:Whoops

[Pretzalzz]

Huh? I know this is slashdot and no one reads the story, but if you are going to strut around trying to make yourself look smart you should try. This guy obviously knew that renting it was a very bad deal which is why he bought out the rest on the rental after only two months when he had the money. He didn't wait two months to buy it since it was a time sensitive need as his wife needed it for course work.

Re:Whoops

[vivian]

You need to widen your circle of friends then - or teach them how to start saving. Anyone should be able to reduce their cost of living to that it is 90% of their income, and save the remaining 10%. It's all a question of living within your means, and learning how to save so you don't have to depend on the state or your kids to support you when you retire.

Re:Whoops

[Nick Ives]

I bet $20,000 is the mean amount in savings, which would be pushed up by all the {m,b}illionaires.

I wonder what the modal average savings is? I bet it's a lot lower.

Re:Whoops

[wmbetts]

Personally anytime I'm on my mbp I just sit there nude while I program. If anyone spies on me they deserve what they get!

Re:Whoops

[mwvdlee]

(I'm used to it, we PC repairmen are like plumbers that way)

No we're not.
We don't star in computer games and we don't appear in cheezy porn.

Re:Whoops

[JSombra]

Around 2008 average saving per year for Americans was less than $400, though from what i have heard, due to the shaky economy it has now risen a little bit

Re:Whoops

[jimicus]

So what you're saying is, maybe all those people who tell you that you should never, ever buy anything on credit (because credit is evil and you should always buy everything with cash), should get a crash course on something called "opportunity cost"? It's not as if it's hard for a student to get a credit card.

These companies don't aim at people who can easily get a credit card. I don't know what it's like where you are, but here in the UK they've got very flashy window displays proudly announcing things like "Poor credit history? No proof of earnings? Not a homeowner? No problem!". The actual final price you wind up being stung for is carefully hidden.

They'll sell to more-or-less anyone, and the business model is clear - their customers have a high risk of not paying, but that doesn't matter too much because the item that was sold under a 12 or 24 month contract was actually paid for in the first 3-6 months. Provided the customer continues to pay for longer than that, you're in profit. And they often will, because you're not the sort of company that writes a few rude letters before taking someone to court over missed payments. You're the sort of company that sends around a couple of big, threatening-looking men to take the item away if payment is so much as 10 days late.

Such companies are vultures, they prey on a section of society that wants the latest toys but cannot hope to afford them. But they're very well dressed, very smart vultures with high street business premises, which is enough for the target market not to realise what they're letting themselves in for until it's far too late.

Re:Whoops

[gl4ss]

I did that, but then I got thin and gorgeous and now they have to pay for me to remove the tape.

Re:Whoops

[jimicus]

Do you know, I think you're the first person to get it in the whole thread?

These companies do not sell to people who will do a bit of arithmetic and work out the most cost-effective way of getting what they want. They don't expect to sell anything to such a person.

They sell to a group who want the latest thing and focus purely on how much it'll cost them per month.

Clearly this group of people is big enough to sustain such businesses or they wouldn't exist.

Re:Whoops

[DamienRBlack]

I am a "poor person". A "serially-poor" one. Math has been and still is my subject of interest. Currently, my skill in math lies somewhere mid-way through differential equations. My mathematics education, as well as computer science, physics, chemistry, philosophy and music are all gained from auditing college classes. Do to circumstances currently beyond my control, I can't afford to actually take the classes. I cannot get a loan, as I made a mistake when I was 17 years old and forgot to un-enroll from a semester of classes I didn't end up taking. Now I owe a state owned collection agency $6,000 plus a hefty amount of interest. I can't enroll or take out student loans until I've paid in full. Actually, it suits me fine. I prefer learning on my own and I don't think I could stand the tedium of going to classes over things I've known and used for years. In the meantime though, I find myself unable to "prove" to anyone my merit. So I find myself without a job that pays a reasonable amount. I am currently running a business, but the truth is that it takes lots of money to make money. I scrape by, but only barely. And I assure you, it isn't because of my math skills.

Re:Whoops

[adamofgreyskull]

FYI: I'm pretty sure that when someone says they are going to pay for a car or a house "with cash", they don't mean they're going to walk into the dealership/estate agent's office with a suitcase full of bank notes, they mean they're going to buy it with money they have on hand, rather than buy it on credit/with a mortgage.

Re:Whoops

[Hazel Bergeron]

(1) Median is not mean;

(2) I've never met a decent rich guy, and I was brought up in a significantly privileged environment - while I've never used money to decide on my friends, I've never been able to form a lasting friendship with anyone of significant means as they have all failed at demonstrating kindness/selflessness/generosity/etc and end up taking advantage of me when I try to demonstrate same. Causation no, but correlation certainly;

(3) People in debt (e.g. medical bills) don't get to save anything, let alone 10%;

(4) Many people live on the bread line - for any given location, recalling the cost of transport, there is a typical minimum wage which reflects the absolute minimum needed to survive. Many people are on this wage. The idea that you can always "save the remaining 10%" is inherently irrational and contrary to basic market theory: if it's an employers' market, employers will pay the absolute minimum to keep their employees alive and working;

(5) Telling people to "live within your means" is another way of saying, "I should get to enjoy life more than you so please continue suffering so that I can maintain my enjoyment." While I live well below my means, I don't begrudge anyone who feels he should have no less than the greatest glutton;

(6) You pay the state when you work to support you when you cannot. If taxation were at the level of, say, the US 150 years ago, then you might have an argument. It is not and you do not.

Re:Whoops

[wildstoo]

Until the manager shows up at your door with a picture of you taken surreptitiously on your own webcam.

Seriously, how dumb is this company?

Re:Whoops

[Will.Woodhull]

The UK is offering more useful assistance to its poorer citizens than the USA is doing. I do not think that is a surprise to anyone.

The USA is still crippled by a social Darwinism view of economics. That anyone with a bit of intelligence and self-discipline could significantly improve their circumstances; rise to the top. The unfortunate flip side of this world view is that anyone in poorer circumstances than your own is unfit for survival in a progressive economy and deserves whatever exploitation you can come up with that would benefit you.

An alternative world view is that through cooperation and better exploitation of current and emerging technologies, we can make the whole pie bigger,. That the appropriate way to measure one's success is not by comparing what you've got with what other people have, but by comparing what you've got now with what you had yesterday, and what would be possible tomorrow if people will work to make that happen.

Re:Whoops

[realityimpaired]

Not an American, but I usually keep a float of about $1000 (CAD) in my bank account to pay for incidentals, the rest of the overage in my monthly budget goes towards paying my car loan and mortgage off faster. If I wanted to, I could easily put away more (there's a little over $600/mo surplus in my monthly budget), but it makes better economic sense to pay off those large loans faster, in order to reduce the interest that I'm paying overall: if I pay my car loan off 2 years early, I only pay 0.9% interest on the thing (it goes up to 1.9% in the final two years). The mortgage is a higher interest rate anyway, and for now, that's what I'm overpaying.

It's well and good to suggest that people should be saving more money, but there's times where building up your savings is a bad idea. Most poor people aren't even in a position where building up their savings is an option because they simply aren't paid enough, and many if not most middle class people are in the same situation that I am: putting away money is possible, but it's bad economic sense in the long run, because they can save thousands, if not tens of thousands of dollars by paying off their debt faster.

Re:Whoops

[turtledawn]

Are you including retirement savings in your estimate of average savings account value? I certainly have more than 20k in my retirement accounts, but due to some recent medical crap I'm happy to have a few hundred in my day-to-day savings and heck yeah I put the cat's most recent vet bill on my credit card to preserve that little cash cushion (though my interest rate on that card is under 10%).

Re:Whoops

[Grizzley9]

I was with you until #5. Then you made it into a class warfare or fairness argument and that's where I'll disagree. Because it's at that point where people fall into the debt trap by feeling they deserve to have the things the Jones have next door that have more money. It doesn't matter how or when you get money, people with less money should not try to live as those that have more else they get in that trap, then get bitter when things fall apart. It's greed and coveting and it does nothing but hurt you in the long run.

Re:Whoops

[Machtyn]

I agree with you. Though, I think I agree with those that advocate a 3 month bumper in savings. That is, if you lose your job, will you be able to pay the minimum on all your bills for 3 months from savings? If not, back off paying down the debts of those loans until the savings is "full".

Re:Whoops

[rtb61]

Dumb enough for that manager to spend a few months cooling his heels in jail. The first thing these people should do with regard to that civil suit is get press criminal charges and simply let the government prove their case, it will save quite a chunk of money in their claim.

Re:Whoops

[scot4875]

I'm not sure how that reconciles with the claim that the poor "pay a substantial percentage of their incomes in taxes."

Sales taxes. Gas taxes. Property taxes. (If you're renting, you're indirectly paying your landlord's property taxes.) Sin taxes. "Regulatory fees" on cable, phone, and internet connections. State income taxes. All those "hidden" taxes that everyone bitches about all the time.

There are more taxes than just federal income tax. None of those sound like very much to you? You're obviously not poor. Try adding it all up and seeing what percentage comes out of your take-home pay when you're on minimum wage, with no benefits -- and you have the option of paying $200/month for insurance, or $140 per visit to the doctor. The state of Washington has no income tax -- yet it somehow has the most effectively regressive tax structure in the nation; the rich pay roughly 20% in various taxes, and the poor also pay roughly 20% in taxes.

But no, of course, according to you everybody who is "poor" is really just fine, their only problem is that they can't afford the 56" plasma TV that their neighbor has. If some percentage of the poor have a cell phone that they're paying $75/month for, then obviously they aren't *really* poor, because they could instead use that $75/month ($870/year) to buy groceries and quit whining. Nevermind that even if they saved that $870/year for 10 years, it still wouldn't even be worth enough to have any sort of real financial independence.

What's that? Invest it you say? And then have their entire meager savings wiped out when the next bubble pops? That sounds like a *great* idea.

TL;DR: the reason you can't reconcile how the poor have a significant amount of their income go to taxes -- even without paying a cent in federal income tax -- is because you're ignorant.

--Jeremy

Shocking

[hinesbrad]

Wow. A company that built a fortune based on scummy financial deals is being discovered for scummy conduct on computers it sells. Shocking.

On the motherboard?

[Jonah Hex]

PC Rental Agent includes components soldered into the computer's motherboard or otherwise physically attached to the PC's electronics, the lawsuit said. It therefore cannot be uninstalled and can only be deactivated using a wand, the suit said.

Seriously, they had to go with a hardware/software solution, when they could have very easily done it in software only? And what does that do to the warranty from the original manufacturer, soldering new parts into your motherboard usually voids those.

Also, given the demographic of people who "Rent to Own", I'd hate to see some of those webcam shots...

HEX

Re:On the motherboard?

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Unless there are additional details not disclosed on their kinda sleazy looking; but unabashed website, the hardware component seems like it is either a mistake(perhaps referring to some sort of anti-theft tag?) or an additional feature specific to this major chain.

If you look at the company's pricing information, it only quotes software licensing fees and prices for additional/replacement/updated install media. No mention of hardware components, much less the sort of model-specific inventory mess that any deep integration would require. Obviously, the information available on the seller's site for that offering doesn't preclude a custom offering for a large customer, with more robust features; but it also isn't as though lying about the existence of super-tough hardware security in order to reduce the risk that your clueless customer tries to have their nephew who "knows computers" install a cracked copy of XP on a "bricked" machine would be a terribly unlikely strategy...

Re:On the motherboard?

[captainkoloth]

Unless there are additional details not disclosed on their kinda sleazy looking; but unabashed website, the hardware component seems like it is either a mistake(perhaps referring to some sort of anti-theft tag?) or an additional feature specific to this major chain.

If you look at the company's pricing information, it only quotes software licensing fees and prices for additional/replacement/updated install media. No mention of hardware components, much less the sort of model-specific inventory mess that any deep integration would require. Obviously, the information available on the seller's site for that offering doesn't preclude a custom offering for a large customer, with more robust features; but it also isn't as though lying about the existence of super-tough hardware security in order to reduce the risk that your clueless customer tries to have their nephew who "knows computers" install a cracked copy of XP on a "bricked" machine would be a terribly unlikely strategy...

Unless there are additional details not disclosed on their kinda sleazy looking; but unabashed website, the hardware component seems like it is either a mistake(perhaps referring to some sort of anti-theft tag?) or an additional feature specific to this major chain.

If you look at the company's pricing information, it only quotes software licensing fees and prices for additional/replacement/updated install media. No mention of hardware components, much less the sort of model-specific inventory mess that any deep integration would require. Obviously, the information available on the seller's site for that offering doesn't preclude a custom offering for a large customer, with more robust features; but it also isn't as though lying about the existence of super-tough hardware security in order to reduce the risk that your clueless customer tries to have their nephew who "knows computers" install a cracked copy of XP on a "bricked" machine would be a terribly unlikely strategy...

There appears to be something they add either through hardware or software than can require you to use a USB thumb drive as a key. Check out the accessories page. I'm going to say that it's both hardware and software.
"Require an unLock device like a CD or a USB Thumb Drive to always be available or the device locks. It will not work unless the unLock device is found."

Rent a computer?

[PhreakOfTime]

There was an ad around here not too long ago about something similar. While I was listening to it, they obviously mentioned the 'monthly price' and the length of the term. Before the commercial was over I had done the math in my head, and the laptop ended up costing almost 4X the amount it would have otherwise cost.

I imagine this is probably similar. Anyone who signs such a deal should immediately be enrolled in a math class that will sufficiently explain amortization costs in such a situation. They should then be able to pass an exam that proves they are aware of what the real cost is, in a single number, over the rental term.

There is a reason the phrase 'A fool and his money are soon parted' exists, I suppose.

Re:Rent a computer?

[demonlapin]

The people who take this deal don't qualify for better credit. If you ban rent-to-own or limit the interest rates, though, their choices actually get worse, not better. After all, the moment that it leaves the front door of the store, this laptop is a used piece of equipment owned by someone who can't swing several hundred dollars in spare cash (i.e., probably not the most fastidious owner). Shitty credit deals are all they're going to get, because nobody is going to loan them $1000 at 5% interest - the default risk is too high.

Re:Rent a computer?

[adolf]

My math says it's not so different from paying for a new PC with a credit card at not-very-favorable rates.

And, in both cases, there is the opportunity to buy/pay off the thing at any time. Aaron's retail prices tend to be on the high side of things, but not outlandishly so (in my observation).

And for some folks, renting is a distinct advantage: Why buy a thing, just to replace it a year or two later (and fuss with selling the old one), when you can just rent the current thing and have it replaced when it is deemed old?

These aren't leases. They're just month-to-month (sometimes, week-to-week) rentals. Need a fast laptop for a project, with no foreseeable need for one after that? Just rent one.

Want an additional comfy couch for the house and a big TV to watch "the game" on with your pals, and a dedicated fridge to keep the keg cold until it runs out, but have no desire for these things to take up long-term space? Rent 'em. They even drop them off and pick them up. (Hell, with the deposit for them, even the keg+tap might be considered to be a rental...)

Of course, there's the dark side, as well: Want a new computer, long-term, but can't afford one? Rent-to-own might not be the most practical choice.

All that said: I, myself, don't rent anything. I buy my houses and have my own name on the deed, I buy my cars, and I buy my electronics and furniture. I have rented apartments before, but got out of that game as quickly as possible. The closest thing I do to renting things, these days, is Netflix.

But I'm not allergic to the concept.

YMMV.

Re:Rent a computer?

[demonlapin]

You would, but you probably have savings accounts, home access to the Internet, a credit card, a stable address, nobody trying to steal your pocket money for drugs/booze/etc, and a lot more intelligence than these people. If you ban check cashing places, people go to pawn shops; if you ban pawn shops, they go to loan sharks. Rent-to-own is part of the same continuum, in which people who are bad credit risks are able to obtain things they want (but can't afford in lump sum, and won't save up enough to purchase) quickly and easily in return for paying a high cost (that covers the enormous risk of default).

Even when I made the equivalent of $22k/yr in today's money, I didn't do these things. That's one of the many reasons that I'm not still making $22k/year. These people can't delay gratification enough to save up, nor are they smart enough to earn a lot more. The best path is a tough call, because the renters-to-own aren't going to get any smarter - all we can change is whether or not it is possible to lend to them profitably.

Re:Rent a computer?

[Kral_Blbec]

The point is that they don't need to save for long time. Two of their "low payments" would be enough to buy a decent system outright. If they can make the "low payments" they can save.

Re:Rent a computer?

[Velex]

Ok, this is what I have never understood about the poor. I've lived on ~12k per year before at a fast food job I WALKED TO, so I know what I'm talking about. Perhaps as long as they get their government check and government foodstamps they'll never understand.

All that you have to do to get a "credit card" is open an account at a credit union. You don't need credit for that. Just get a damned job, go to a credit union with your first paycheck, and open an account. Problem solved. It's not some magical thing that only rich white kids can do.

What the hell happened to personal responsibility?

Re:Rent a computer?

[balbus000]

These people can't delay gratification enough to save up

Reminds me of this.

Re:from TFA: owning it outright vs OS

[metalmaster]

The percentage of people who install a vanilla OS themselves is quite small. Most consumers will rely on the preinstalled software given to them by the PC manufacturer. If something goes wrong, the mildly intelligent ones will put load the same exact software from a replacement DVD. The ones who arent as smart will take their PC to a repair shop where the tech will load the DVD for them.

Its all about things that "just work"

you can't consent to child porn

[Joe The Dragon]

you can't consent to child porn and you can't sign away your rights or have stuff in the fine print saying we can read your CC or SS or bank account numbers from the system.

"Crystal gets online before she gets a shower and checks her grades," Brian Bird said. "Who knows? They could print that stuff off there and take it home with them."

He added: "I've got a 5-year-old boy who runs around all day and sometimes he gets out of the tub running around for 20, 30 seconds while we're on the computer. What if they took a picture of that? I wouldn't want that kind of garbage floating around out there."

Re:you can't consent to child porn

[Travelsonic]

Says the cases where contracts have been rendered entirely or partially illegal/unenforcable due to such attempts.

Re:you can't consent to child porn

[yakatz]

you can't consent to child porn and you can't sign away your rights or have stuff in the fine print saying we can read your CC or SS or bank account numbers from the system.

I am not really sure what child exploitation has to do with it. Since when are pictures of naked children called child porn? That is a 2/10 on the original COPINE Scale, and it does not appear at all on the SAP scale at all (note, I am not talking about posed pictures).

Now that we are past that, who said you can't have "stuff in the fine print" saying anything? Last time I checked, if you sign a contract, you have agreed to whatever it says, which includes the fine print whether you read it or not and even if you think that it does not make sense. You have the right not to sign anything that you feel will be detrimental to you.
Another point: I am sure plenty of people who agree with your comment have used public computers, lets say in the library, to check their email or their bank or some other password protected service. When you use that computer, do you have a right that there can't be something on that computer to steal your information? Why should this be any different?

Re:you can't consent to child porn

[johncandale]

http://www.solresearch.org/~SOLR/rprt/LookNow.asp#Sct_1_NakedKidPics There have been many dozen cases of people taking pics of their baby kids in a bathtub or otherwise half dressed and successfully convicted. I pulled that link in about 10 seconds of google but I'm sure /. and others have better links. Please please read the news once and awhile so you know why people are upset about privacy going bye bye and the myth of "if you have nothing to hide..." Even if you won on appeal, you still have years of your life with the added stress of a young child ruined.

Re:you can't consent to child porn

[MaskedSlacker]

Last time I checked, if you sign a contract, you have agreed to whatever it says

Then you didn't check very hard. There are all kinds of things you cannot legally agree to (or rather, that you cannot be legally forced to comply with after having agreed to them).

Re:you can't consent to child porn

[LordLucless]

I agree with you in general, but after looking at some of the links on the site, it becomes pretty obvious they have an agenda.

SOLR Quote:

Charleston, W.Va., 2007. Melissa Hicks did not mention any sexual improprieties during the divorce proceedings against her husband, David. But after she was not granted custody of their two daughters, he became the pariah of the neighborhood and was sentenced to 30 years in prison for alleged misdeeds with various little girls.

Quote from linked FBI file:

The evidence presented at trial established that Hicks, a father of two girls under the age of 10, frequently had his older daughter’s friends spend the night as guests. Five of these juveniles, girls between the ages of nine and 12, testified at trial. During their testimony, the girls stated Hicks frequently took photos of them while they were at the home, commented on his ability to see through their clothing, walked in on them while they were changing or bathing, watched and photographed them through the blinds of the home while they were swimming in his pool, and physically touched more than one of them inappropriately. Many of the photos taken by Hicks were located on his computer in a special archive folder. The photos were of his daughter’s friends either nude or partially nude.

The evidence also established that Hicks is a trained computer expert who maintained a computer in his bedroom that had four separate hard drives. These hard drives, in addition to numerous compact disks, contained thousands of images and movies of prepubescent children engaged in sexually explicit conduct. Forensic analysis of this electronic media revealed Hicks searched for sexually explicit movie clips of children using a peer-to-peer file sharing program, and then downloaded the movie clips to his computer. Hicks forfeited all of his computer equipment associated with these crimes.

So yeah, SOLR's quote is technically true. It just doesn't mention that the "alleged offences" were also confirmed in a court of law, due in part to photographic evidence.

Re:Whose consent is needed?

[Penguinshit]

even when Ma Bell owned the telephones and only leased them to private homes they still needed a warrant to eavesdrop on calls. In the case of corporate resources, those are provided with the expectation that anything done with them is work product (which the company owns).

Electrical tape over the webcam

[jtownatpunk.net]

Seriously. I own all of my hardware and do a bare-metal install on every laptop but there's no telling when some piece of malware may come out that secretly takes snapshots with the webcam. Or maybe I do a video chat then forget to turn off the camera. Heck, my current laptop doesn't even have a status light to warn me if it's on.

If I was renting/borrowing a laptop, I'd be even more inclined to be careful. Heck, I'd probably do everything on a VM.

Re:Electrical tape over the webcam

[Anonymous Coward]

Easy to solve - just run Linux, and there's pretty much no chance of the webcam working even if you wanted it to ;)

Re:Whose consent is needed?

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Given that this specific case involved a computer that had been paid off(and, unless demonstrated otherwise, strongly suggests that they don't remove their bugs upon transfer of ownership generally...) I suspect that they would likely be up shit creek under such laws in this circumstance.

More generally, I'd imagine that it depends how much the judicial/jury opinion falls under the sway of soothing babble about "legitimate digital asset management practices..." and how much it falls under the "Yeah, this is pretty much like I was renting an apartment, so my landlord decided he could install a camera in my shower" analogy.

Precedent could allow them quite substantial leeway if this case gets linked to the "the Company owns and watches everything you do while in the building" body of case law; but if it falls in with the body of precedent concerning rented dwellings and other things with long and emotively engaging histories, they could have Serious Issues.

If, of course, anybody finds a cache of kiddie porn being generated by the sorts of bored sleazeballs who would work for a rent-to-own company using the spyware, heads will probably roll.

are "we" really better with our money?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm interested to read these comments regarding the fiscal foolishness of renting and have thought the exact same things when seen similar advertisements. I do wonder if the very rich would say the same about us in regards to buying land and houses though - how many times do we pay for our house at 7% PA over 25 years? Also how many of us have bought computers and gear on our credit cards at 15% PA or something?

It is true that the fool and his money are easily parted but I'm not so convinced that we're that much better than those who rent computers sometimes...

I do feel for those who really struggle and I think some of these attitudes (which I'm guilty off also) are a bit harsh. They're also seemingly more vulnerable to other illogical deals (in regards to the maths) like going in lotteries and other gambling (gee how does that casino pay for all that fancy stuff?). They use pawn brokers for temporary loans at ridiculous interest rates and are more prone to buy shonky cars with limited life/value again at bad interest rates etc.

I'm not any kind of expert in socialology but I'm sure there would have been studies and research done in how the poor are more susceptible to being tricked out of their already meagre resources. Its pretty easy for us "middle class" folks to be a bit wiser and more informed in such things.

Re:from TFA: owning it outright vs OS

[Local ID10T]

So yet again the same lesson: _never_ trust a computer on which you have not installed the OS yourself, and kept 100% secure from malware.

It just boggles my mind seeing people use these computers from big box stores loaded up with crapware, without having the first idea what all that shit does. Why would you use a computer like that? It's idiotic. This case is an even worse example: you trusted the OS that was there, which came complete with spyware.

You are a computer geek. It is obvious to YOU, not so obvious to the general public (aka Joe Sixpack).

Do you use a (modern) car? How about a cellphone? Do you know what all of it's components do? Do you know what data is being recorded about your daily habits? Do you know who has access to that data? Or do you just trust the engineers who designed it and the technician who maintains it for you?

Most people make a compromise between functionality and control. We don't know how to make or do everything, so we trust others to do it for us. Sometimes they fuck us. Sometimes we don't like getting fucked by anyone besides Ms Wallace... so we call in a couple of hard hitting attorneys and get medieval on their asses. (yes, that's a bad Pulp Fiction reference...)

Rent To Own

[wlandman]

Many people are taking an arrogant view of these people and there math skills. Yet those same people leaving comments live in houses they couldn't afford to buy outright. They drive cars, they can't afford either. I think most people use the Rent-To-Own because of cash-flow problems, not stupidity. Remember, it only takes one major emergency to help you lose everything. Don't laugh or look down upon these people.

Re:Rent To Own

[GeckoAddict]

The rule you're describing is simple, pay things in the following order of priority:
Loans and payments that can't be discharged in bankruptcy (student loans, child support, etc.)
Secured debt (house, auto)
Unsecured debt (credit card, medical, etc)

And as someone who just had to do it: my wife had a medical emergency that required surgery, and we owed a few grand that I didn't have at the time. I called them up, they asked 'can you afford $150/month? Yes, OK, that will be your payment at 0% until paid'. Medical places would much rather get paid slowly than not get paid at all.

that just makes us look bad

[Anonymous Coward]

I work at an Aarons Sales and Lease. . As the resident tech guy, I install the PC agent software on all computers before they are sold. If we don't hear from a customer for more than usually around ten days after their bill is due, we send a lock out message. The software pings the server and a red screen pops up asking them to call the store. When they pay or make an arrangement with us, we give them a 7 digit code that unlocks it. It provides ability to view screenshots and take webcam shots but it is only used when a computer is reported stolen and we have a copy of a police report than we utilize it. When they pay out, I go online and mark the agent for uninstall and thats that.

As far at the RTO business model criticism goes, Aaron's at least cost about as much as if you charged it. All the computers have a two year warranty and I provide damn good customer service which makes up for any more of a price difference.

Re:that just makes us look bad

[MimeticLie]

It provides ability to view screenshots and take webcam shots but it is only used when a computer is reported stolen and we have a copy of a police report than we utilize it.

Clearly that isn't the case.

Re:that just makes us look bad

[fermion]

which is all fine and good if the customer was told about this and they initialed next to the section indicating that the capability is there and some random tech would have the ability to watch yo uhave sex so maybe the computer should go somewhere else. Of course if the customer knew, they would tape the camera. So that would defeat the purpose.

What we are talking about is is the right of a firm to have a customer sign away basic rights. For instance, would Aaron's include a cluase that if the rent was late, a rep would have the right to molest a person, child or adult, in the family of thier choice. Of course not. Then why should Aaron's have the right to watch a peep show. Sure the policy is that this feature will only be used under certain circumstances, and I am sure 99.9999% of the well paid professionals that have access to the computer will do this, but really, why take the risk that the one remaining employee is not going to be jacking off to some kid? What is the rational? To catch the customers that say the computer was stolen but in fact are still using it? Does Aarons have such equipment on furniture and TV so they can watch kids make out? I think not, yet they are doing well without it.

This is just a case where a firm is being an arrogant dumbass. If the customers were told and they initialed their consent, then I am wrong. If the customers do not know that some creppy guy is potentially watching the kids run around the trailer, then Aarons deserves to be sued for all it can be sued for. It is not because the business model is inherently bad. It is because firms all to often think they can do anything for profit. Sell drugs to kids, frisk customers on the way out, intimidate them into an upsale. As consumers, even those with just enough money to rent to own, we must assert ourselves as the powerful agents in this relationship. After all, we are the ones that have the money, and the retailers are the one's who need it. By accepting the fiction that we are the weak one's, we allow the retailers to screw us.

wipe it

[erica_ann]

I think if I rented a computer from anywhere, I would wipe the drive and install linux.. or at least reinstall windows using their windows key.. and when I returned it? I would low level format it ;) talk about an ID theft opportunity...

Re:Webcams are creepy

[Dr Fro]

How about a piece of duct tape?

Designerware

[Animats]

State of Pennsylvania Business Search:

DESIGNERWARE
Fictitious Names - Domestic
Entity Number: 2808492
Status: Active
Entity Creation Date: 3/30/1998
State of Business.: PA
Principal Place of Business: 108 HUTCHINSON
NORTH EAST (a real place, a borough of Erie County 5 miles northeast of the city of Erie) PA 16428-1710

Owners Name: TIMOTHY S KELLY

Google Maps shows that as a 2-story frame house in reasonably good condition with two cars in the driveway..

Dun and Bradstreet reports

DESIGNERWARE
Single Location: 108 HUTCHINSON DR, NORTH EAST, PA

You can buy a D&B credit report on them.

Checking Erie County property records:

Address 108 | HUTCHINSON | DR
Acreage 0.2870
Topo LEVEL
Utility ALL PUBLIC
Zoning SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
Land Value / Taxable 18,000 / 18,000.00
Building Value / Taxable 120,560 / 120,560.00
Total Value / Taxable 138,560 / 138,560.00
Clean & Green: Inactive
Homestead Status: Active
Style CONVENTIONAL
Basement FULL
Year Built 1973
Exterior Wall ALUMINUM/VINYL
Total Living Area 3156
Full Baths 2, Half Baths 1
Heating GAS, CENTRAL, FORCED AIR
Stories 2.0, Total Bedrooms 3, Total Family Rooms 0, Total Rooms 7, Fireplaces 1
REINFORCED CONCRETE POOL 1992
FRAME UTILITY SHED 1990
Sales History: 1/26/1990

Re:from TFA: owning it outright vs OS

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Bad news, I'm afraid. I just sent an HTCPCP PROPFIND request to your coffee maker and recieved a response code: "418 I'm a teapot". On the plus side, that is fully standard compliant. On the minus side, you'd better get ready to like earl grey.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion