Slashdot Mirror
Court Allows Webcam Spying On Rental Laptops
tekgoblin writes "Back in May there was a class action lawsuit filed against the rental company Aaron's, which had secretly installed spying software that would turn on a laptop's webcam, take pictures and then send them back to the company. Overall it seemed like a large invasion of privacy, which should at least warrant an injunction to stop use of the software until the case is settled, right? Not to the judge, who refused to order an injunction on the grounds that the family was no longer in possession of the laptop. As for everyone else still using their Aaron's laptops, the judge had this to say to them (PDF): 'Moreover, it is purely conjecture that the other members of the putative class will be subjected to remote access of personal information.'"
invasion of privacy. cause you know if they can they will.
... it is okay if anyone bugs the judge's house?
Because until you actually record/hear anything, "it is purely conjecture that someone will use the micros to remote access of personal information".
Why can't
Should I go ahead and uninstall that wiretapping software, there's nothing I'm liable for, am I? I mean, I just removed very obviously malicious software, the rental place should be happy that I did it. They would surely have informed me if they installed something like this deliberately.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
How about "Boycott Aaron's until they stop including spying software in their rental laptops".
Don't give me "Some people can't afford to boycott them" as there will be other companies who don't do this, and if not there's a business opportunity for someone.
Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
So, when are you Americans going to exercise your Second Amendment rights and just shoot this bastard?
1 - give rented laptop to family's teen child 2 - Let her do what teens do in front of webcams 3 - sue company for creation of CP (bonus) - eat popcorn as you watch SWAT teams storming their office. 5 - PROFIT!
They do not have the laptop anymore so there's no way the injunction could go ahead
it's a class action suit. Everyone else in the effected class still has the laptops (unless aarons has an injunction against renting laptops).
Thats what I always do - perhaps I'm paranoid but it only takes a few seconds and it resolves all of these sorts of issues along with malware checking you out. But then I don't use skype or do webchats , perhaps for someone who did it would be a nuisance but if not I recommend everyone to do it.
Oh look people's rights being stomped on again, seems like a common theme these days. I hope goverments don't sit around wondering why their populations are pissed off at them, cause they sure as hell don't have to look far.
... to increasingly hold the general public in disdain. I'm not sure where this attitude is coming from , perhaps the law profession is attracting the wrong type of person or the wrong sort is being promoted to the judiciary by like minded misfits of a similar persuation already entrenched there, but its a worrying precedant either way.
The software is only supposed to be used to find the location of stolen equipment or equipment out of lease so that the equipment can be easily retrieved. The problem was that when the plaintiffs paid cash for the laptop the cash was diverted by a dishonest employee and never got recorded. As far as the manager knew the laptop was out of lease and needed to be retrieved. The plaintiffs failed to make the case that the software was being used on a regular basis to spy on owners or renters of the equipment. There was evidence that the software was being used but the purpose of that use is unclear. Due to that, the injunction was not granted.
The out of context quote 'Moreover, it is purely conjecture that the other members of the putative class will be subjected to remote access of personal information' is salacious at best. Not it says "will be subjected" not "can be subjected". It is not proven that other renters will have their money stolen by an dishonest employee and their laptop considered out of lease.
i wonder how long this will last when stores all around the country start getting their storefront glass broken with rocks that have messages about spyware on laptops attached to them...
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
As usual with coverage of complex legal decisions, the headlines and soundbites don't resemble the decision at all. The case hasn't even begun; the judge did not "allow" the webcams at all. He's just ruling on a preliminary injunction before the case begins: the plaintiff is asking for the judge to issue an order stopping Aaron's from further use of the cameras while the case is going on. The judge is saying here that the injunction is moot because the plaintiff doesn't have the laptop, and hasn't presented any evidence that anyone else is being recorded. The judge is just saying (1) he can't order Aaron's to stop doing something when there's no evidence that they're actually doing it, and (2) the case is weak because the law under which they are suing may not apply (which is true; the plaintiffs ought to be suing under more general privacy torts). Under no stretch of reality does this mean he's "allowing" the use of the webcams.
--Lee Daniel Crocker : http://www.etceterology.com My life is in the public domain.
always show them your ass too....creepy sickos
is that you goaste?
It's basically an anti-theft system. If someone steals Aaron's laptop they'll have a better chance of tracking that person down. I wish my own computer had that feature.
Another user pointed out that this is a pre-trial ruling, but imagine if a ruling like this was passed down to the final verdict. Most all schools like to "lease" their laptops. A ruling with a measure like this attached could harm future cases.
A piece of black tape over the camera.
In the course of every project, it will become necessary to shoot the scientists and begin production.
Or better yet, if there are laws about / against this practice, how about the company... follow them NOT DO THIS IN THE FIRST PLACE?
If you believe in privacy, and believe you have "nothing to hide" at the same time, you're a goddammed idiot
... then what happens once you own it? Does the rental company somehow remove their spying software? Or do they retain the ability to spy on the person who now owns the computer outright?
The correct term is "gently caressing".
In the case of the school, the spying was being done on a broad spectrum of the general public. In this case, it just victimizes stupid white trash.
That's one of numerous differences that immediately come to mind.
No, my first question was "I wonder if the Judge Susan Baxter would be okay if she learned that her U.S. government IT staff were secretly taking webcam pics of her with her federal-owned laptop." After all, it's not her property right? It belongs to the federal government. So I'm sure she would be totally cool with her IT people taking random webcam footage of her whenever they felt like it.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
This is 2011 read 1984, if you have any expectation of privacy you can find it on aisle 33 1/3 next to the unicorns.
A piece of electrical tape over the camera would have solved this. Who still uses webcams?
I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
In one case, someone recording the police (who are public office and should as such reasonably expect no secrecy while in public) is wiretapping, but someone who rents a laptop and is recorded without his consent isn't?
I see, if i'll ever rent a laptop i'll print out goatse and slap it in app. distance from the camera.
I'm going to get hated on for this,
Yes, and deservedly so.
but if you're renting a laptop. it's not yours.
No one is claiming ownership of the laptop, but the real problem is this next bit:
This company has every right to do whatever the hell they want with it.
Pants-on-head crazy. If you rent/lease an apartment, can your landlord take a shower at night in your bathroom? Can he watch you while you sleep? It's not just creepy-wrong, it's illegal.
Don't like it? Tough. Either go buy a laptop, which makes it yours, or find a way to disable the program, which no doubt is against the rental agreement.
Contract law can be a complicated thing, but here's something to know: if a person tells you to do something illegal, in a contract that you sign,
you don't have to do the illegal thing. If a person says that they're going to do something illegal, and you sign the contract, that doesn't absolve them of wrongdoing.
(This is not legal advice, I am not your lawyer, etc)
Renting does not mean you own it.
No, but it does mean you have certain exclusive rights for a period of time, even more rights than the actual owner. If you rent an apartment, and the landlord leaves cameras around the place he's breaking the law. He doesn't have the right to enter your home, even if he technically owns it. Renting a laptop should be the exact same sort of thing.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
"Renting does not mean you own it."
For all intents and purposes of criminal proceedings, yes, you do. If you are renting an apartment, and you are busted manufacturing drugs, you are considered the owner of the property, not the apartment complex. You lose your rental contract, the apartment complex gets its stuff back (unless it's proven that the apartment complex rented it out with the knowledge that you were going to do something illegal in it in the first place, then they lose their stuff too.)
Same should theoretically apply here.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Abridged constitutional rights are a irreparable injury, Once your privacy has been abridged, you never get that back. Like free speech, if your denied your right to speak a certain time in a certain place in a certain audience, you never get that back. A fundemental constitutional right.
Here they were looking for an injunction to stop the practice and this clown has injoined all defendants to not tamper with the stores ability to abridge privacy.
"we observed that the assertion of First Amendment rights does not automatically require a finding of irreparable injury.).6"
But for a practice that clearly is a constitutional violation, an injuction should have been in order.
Morons like this show how much the "black robe" should be changed to a straightjacket... I've gone WAY past the point where ANY of this insanity surprises me.. You'll have to put a gun to my head to get me to every say "Your Honor".. Of course, the way this country is swirling down the drain, it may come to that, sooner than later..
THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
For the purposes of renting it from a rental company it IS your computer AS LONG as you pay the rental fee. You may be a sysadmin and I'd agree with you 100% on work computers being owned by the employer. A rental computer has NOTHING in common with your example of an employers property...
THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
It may simply not make sense to buy--if, for example, a laptop under warranty breaks, you aren't in a place where you can borrow one, and you need a laptop for that day due to commitments. Or perhaps if your computing habits were such that you didn't use a laptop except for once every two or three years--maybe you use desktops at home and work and usually rely on a blackberry when traveling.
-- IANAL, this isn't legal advice, and definitely isn't legal advice for you. Also, Squee!
The RTO furniture market has a reputation for being a ripoff, preying on poor people. That's a lot different from the musical instrument market that's supporting school band instruments.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
That's not going to help you with the microphone, or when you're actually using the webcam, but it's a start.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
The judge has no balls. By stating that it is "conjecture" that others in the putative class (those others who have rented computers from Aaron's) are also affected by this, the judge is failing to ask the obvious question and of course it seems the plaintiff attorney did not get discovery into Aaron's practice of installing spyware. They already have a police investigation's report that says in no uncertain terms that this is common practice for Aaron's. Depending on who you talk to, this is not conjecture but it certainly wouldn't have hurt to depose a few Aaron's executives and store managers... probably would have helped as what execs and managers would say are likely to be quite different.
This is a case worthy of big media publication. "Aaron's Spies on its customers!"
Whether or not it's illegal, it turned out to be an expensive mistake to the school district that did the same thing: School settles lawsuits over secret photos for $610,000
that masking tape over the camera aperture would fix this?
Boycott? Who the hell uses Aaron's for computer equipment or any rent-to-own? They make Best Buy look like like a bargain basement. Paying $1200 for a $300 computer isn't very bright in the first place. Asking people sharp enough to avoid the scam in the first place to boycott doesn't really work.
I8-D
This will eventually be fixed by a smart judge. Unless the laptop is reported stolen you dont have the right to spy on anyone. Its just common sence.
Jack of all trades,master of none
There is quite a difference between a government facility and a rental store, though. Especially if the laptops in question at the school were required in the curriculum.
No one forced these people to rent a laptop from this store.
So again, unless someone can produce a document that clearly states how this is illegal, I'm not changing my stance.
What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
Here's the problem with your argument: there is nothing inherently illegal about taking a shower, watching someone sleep, or using a webcam. However, any of those things may be illegal if the other person did not give you permission. Signing a contract is giving permission. Your argument about contracts only applies if giving permission is not a legal option (eg., I sign a contract for you to kill me, You sign a contract to sell yourself into slavery, etc).
First Aspen Way is not a 'root kit provider', it is the operator of an Aaron's store. The software (which was not a root kit) provider is DesignerWare, and they state that their software does not do what is claimed by the plaintiff.
Secondly, and more importantly, you completely skipped (but the judge referenced repeatedly) the phrase "irreparable harm". Irreparable harm is damage that can not be undone by any means. Identity theft clearly does not fall into the category, as it is quite easily remedied with cash (if it is found that someone at Aspen Way is in some way involved in stealing your identity you can sue them and recover damages). Furthermore, there is zero evidence that there actually was any identify theft occurring.
Lastly, the judge clearly explains (and provides the relevant court cases to back it up) that an injunction is "a drastic and extraordinary measure that is not to be routinely granted" and "... the burden on the moving party is particularly heavy". Do you agree with these statements, or do you think it would be perfectly OK for me to go to a judge and get an injunction against you doing something I don't happen to like?
The judge got it right. It has absolutely nothing to do with who has more 'rights'.
"If you get busted for manufacturing drugs inside a rental unit, the court does not take the rental unit away from you, because you do not own it. "
Wrong. I suggest you look up court cases involving Tenant's rights that have explicitly stated that for the duration of the rental agreement, you are considered the owner of the property. Without ownership, you have no rights.
I'm dealing with this RIGHT NOW in court - Moreno Valley, CA, case number MVC1103499 if you care to look it up, Mr. I-Think-I-Know-Better than someone that stomped EA's nuts into the ground over Spore DRM.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Anyone renting a laptop should first boot from a CD and wipe the hard disk, or at least disable booting *from* the hard disk. Put electrical tape over the webcam, stick something muffling or a white noise generator over the microphone, wrap it in tinfoil to prevent GPS records being kept or any cell-based tracking hardware from phoning home...