More Than Half of People Believe Using Spyware To Snoop On Family Members Is Legal, Study Finds (betanews.com)

An anonymous reader writes: A new study shows that 53 percent of people believe it's legal to install a program on a family member's phone to snoop on their activity. The survey of more than 2,000 people in the US and UK by software comparison service Comparitech.com also finds 57 percent would consider spying on their children's phone conversations and messages. [...] It is generally illegal to install an app on another person's phone without their knowledge. Though this does depend on the circumstances. "It's a legal grey area, in that the laws haven't been truly tested in this arena as of yet since the technology is relatively new, so as relevant cases move through the legal system they'll be decided on a case by case basis," says Josh King, a legal expert in privacy laws and the chief legal officer of Avvo, an online legal marketplace in the US. "Intentional infliction of emotional distress, fraud claims -- all could be implicated, depending on the circumstances. It's also possible that the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act could be used to prosecute someone who installs this type of app on someone else's phone."

Comments

Parents

[Jamu]

I'm guessing that half is the parents, and the other half - that disagrees - is the children.

Re:Parents

[Anonymous Coward]

Been there, done (some of) that. I am completely behind monitoring kids' activities' online. My daughters are now 22 and 23 and have always had their own computers. When their computers were put on my LAN and went online (they were 7 and 8), I moved their computers out of their bedroom and into the family room. That was the case until they got notebooks (12 and 13), at which point the notebooks had to stay on the first floor (kitchen and family room). They had cell phones when they were 7 and 8, with the understanding that I would regularly be inspecting the phones. Later on (because they were pretty good kids) regular inspections went out the door, but they knew that I might demand their phone at any time and look through it.

When my younger one was 17, I noticed unusual changes in her behavior and thoughts, even though my wife was completely oblivious to them. After a couple of months of this, one night I asked her to hand over her phone. She did and I basically discovered that she had been seeing a 35 year old man she met during her physical therapy for her knee for a few months. Of course I was furious, but had I not monitored her activity, she would probably have married the asshole and ruined her life and future. I asked for all her credentials (email, FB, etc), changed her passwords, and she wasn't allowed online for 2 months, during which I had to erase the brainwashing that had been done to her during the past few months.

Without monitoring, she would never have offered up any information regarding the changes she was not going through. Before you go all out and call me a clueless parent, let me tell you that I have always been upfront with my kids and no subject has ever been taboo. We did and still do discuss anything and everything and I am and have always been very close to them. When I got home from work (around 7 PM) and started cooking dinner, they were pretty much required to be around the kitchen/family room (and no TV in the family room either), and we always ate dinner together. The point I'm trying to get to is that, with ALL OF THAT, she still fell prey to some douche bag and had I not been monitoring her activity, worst things could have happened.

Should you monitor your kids? Absolutely. Do it. If you don't, you'll never know what they're getting into. My friend is a high school counselor and she tells me about high school kids' lives. Their relationships with their parents are far from the relationship I had with my kids during their high school years, so I really wonder if those parents are aware of what goes on in their kids' lives. I really don't give a shit about the court system coming and telling me I can't put a keylogger on my kid's computer. Let them. I'll fight them and probably win. I don't care if they want to prosecute me for putting a GPS tracker underneath my car that is dedicated to my kids' driving it around. You want to know why? Because raising a kid is hard enough without having to worry about predators out there. If putting that GPS tracker underneath the car, keylogger on my their computer, surveillance software on their notebooks and phone, or any other means of tracking them allows me to sleep better and helps keep them out of harm's way, the government can kiss my ass and fight me in court.

Re:Parents

[Anonymous Coward]

So, where did you hide his body?

Re:Parents

[Anonymous Coward]

So, where did you hide his body?

You will have to check his phone to find that one out.

Re:Parents

[Anonymous Coward]

Why did you have to cook dinner after working all day. Meanwhile the useless wife is oblivious to the kids running out of control.

Look up codependence. I lived that nightmare.

Loser.

Re:Parents

[Anonymous Coward]

Why did you have to cook dinner after working all day. Meanwhile the useless wife is oblivious to the kids running out of control.

Look up codependence. I lived that nightmare.

Loser.

Preach. I'm happily divorced from my narcissist myself! No kids, fuck that bitch!

Re: Parents

[DivineKnight]

You know, these pork ribs you made are the bomb. What's your secret?

Re:Parents

[farble1670]

I told my son that I can see all the websites his phone goes to.

Well, he'll never figure out how to get around that one will he (or figure out you are full of crap)? His friends don't have phones. Or computers. And he'll never figure out how to disable the software checks. Nor will his friends. I'm sure.

I told my son he can look at anything but explained some of the things he's going to find and let him know he should talk to me about if he has questions finds something disturbing. Your kids are going to see it all more sooner than later. It'd behoove you to prep them for that rather than try to hide it from them. All you are doing is letting them know when they do see it that they'd better not let you find out.

By the time your kids are teens you are basically done. They are mainly learning from and emulating their peers and (non-parental) mentors. You'd better hope you've equipped them to handle what they can find online before that. If not you have bigger problems than choosing a surveillance software package.

Re:Parents

[arglebargle_xiv]

"The government does it all the time so it's got to be legal, doesn't it?"

Re:Parents

[Anonymous Coward]

My job is usually networked software of various flavours.

I have every plan to have the capability to monitor my step-daughters activities on the computer. I have told her this. I don't have to be specific about how and it will be a multi-front approach. If she circumvents them, I will know.

If and when she gets a phone that has any sort of data plan, which might be a long time in this era of $700 phones, she will require a CC to pay for it. Can't have that until she's 16 or 18 depending where.

So, as long as I pay for the pipe coming in and any data plan she has, the condition for that will be full and unrestricted access.

I won't use it often. I trust her and I am gradually trying to make her aware of the threats that are out there without scaring the crap out of her. I am also trying to teach her about the dark sides of some stuff that might otherwise seem really interesting. (Not sex per se, but some of the seedier sides of that on the web). Some of that will wait until she's a bit older, but not a lot.

I believe a basic framework of trust plus the thought that the more hazardous attempts to ignore house rules may well get noticed is a good combination. The old phrase "Trust, but verify." is good advice.

I am also clear with her that she gets to make her own decisions about who she is and what she does as she gets older, but that until she shows she can reliably make decisions that follow at least basic safety protocols, that freedom will be monitored at times.

Any parenting strategy boils down to trying to help the child understand the reason for that strategy and integrate that reason into a good decision making framework which she or he will use going forward. It's not about meeting ma and pa's idea of who she is nor is it about taking choice from her because she'll have that entirely in a few years. It's about helping her understand the concerns we are putting out there and giving her some age-appropriate boundaries and knowing those will be policed.

If she's ever good enough to skate around the boundaries I erect, then she will know enough to be pretty safe on the internet (whether she chooses to be will be her own choice). If she chooses not to be technically savvy enough to get around my steps, then she'll learn to live within them.

I'm not too worried, she's a great kid and we have fairly open communication. That could change in the teen years which are impending, but I will certainly work hard to see it doesn't.

And, just as an aside, if you don't have a daughter, the threat level your child faces is statistically much lower. Statistics on sexual predation and exploitation are pretty heavily skewed towards female victims. The theoretical maximum risk is the same, but the practical likelihood is much lower with boys.

Re:Parents

[allo]

> There's a difference between spying on someone and parenting and monitoring your kids' activities on internet devices.
No, it isn't. And you're supporting the government, when it later tells your children "It's not spying, it's for your security, when we store your internet traffic for 18 months".

Re: Parents

[Anonymous Coward]

Really, a credit card for a phone? Ever heard of pre-paid plans? You can buy the phones, and the credits with cash at any WalMart or convenience store.

Re:Parents

[Zero__Kelvin]

Since children don't enjoy the same protections as adults I'm going to say that you are incorrect. In fact, in the vast majority of cases the phone is purchased and paid for by the parents, and technically is the parents phone. I'm sure 5 people will now mod you overrated and mod ME to +5 to correct the situation, because Slashdot, as we all know, is THE HOME of common sense and justice on the internet ;-)

Re: Parents

[peawormsworth]

An owner has rights to use their property as they see fit. If a 25 year old wants to borrow property from their parents or anyone, then they must follow the guidelines for usage set by the owner. The real question is why a 25 year old cannot afford their own property and do what they like with it. Beggars cannot be choosers and borrowers do not have the same freedom as owners.

Re: Parents

[peawormsworth]

Spying on your 25 year old son is just sick. What would you say if he spied on you? If where him, and knew about it, i would give you the finger and gtfo..

What are you concerned about? Are you 25 and still having your parents buy phones and contracts for you? That phone is owned by the parent. If the child doesn't want it and gets their own, then maybe this is the exact result the parent is trying to achieve.

If you own a phone, then it is not spying to track that property. It's like having remote GPS tracking on your own phone or own car and then giving it to relatives when they visit your town. It's not a crime to keep the GPS tracking on while someone else uses your property.

However, installing tracking or eavesdropping on your partners phone when they own it... well that is creepy and should be illegal.

But come on. Respect property rights

Re:Parents

[peawormsworth]

Teenagers should buy their own products. If they cannot, then the parent is not required to buy them what the child feels that they deserve. And if a parent gives them something, that they don't like, they are not compelled to use it. No parent should be forced to purchase something for their child that they do not want the child using or feel could be dangerous in their hands.

You should stop judging others and telling them how to raise their children and go make your own. Then you can manage your children the way you like and stop muddling in other families lives.

Re:Parents

[farble1670]

What kind sad relationship did you have with your parents?

It's upsetting to some parents when they see that others' are able to form trusting, mature relationships with their children. Start saving for bail now.

Re:Parents

[farble1670]

And, just as an aside, if you don't have a daughter, the threat level your child faces is statistically much lower.

Well as long as you are talking about statistics, your child is much, much more likely to be molested by a teacher, friend or family or member than a stranger on the internet. So statistically, you are wasting your time. Spend your time and money on background checks for the people your daughter interacts with in her day to day life, not doing keyword searches in her chat logs.

It's much easier for parents to think about some pervert stranger with pimples luring your daughter into a dark alley. Unfortunately that's just not how it's going to happen. Much harder to think about it being her uncle, her favorite teacher, or a coach.

I have told her this.

Everyone that spies on their kids says this. To me it comes across as more like an "f-u" to her than anything else. At least if you did it clandestine, it's likely she'd never even know you were doing and not suffer the mental trauma for it.

Define "someone else's" phone

[nwaack]

If I'm paying for my kids phone I'll do whatever the hell I please with it.

Re:Define "someone else's" phone

[Anonymous Coward]

If I'm paying for my kids phone I'll do whatever the hell I please with it.

That may sound logical, but the laws against wiretapping don't actually care that you own the telephone you're tapping.

https://www.mwl-law.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/LAWS-ON-RECORDING-CONVERSATIONS-CHART.pdf

Re:Define "someone else's" phone

[amiga3D]

If it's his phone, it's his phone.

Re:Define "someone else's" phone

[geekmux]

If I'm paying for my kids phone I'll do whatever the hell I please with it.

Phones are bought.

Trust is earned.

Good luck with that shit. Legally and otherwise.

Re:Define "someone else's" phone

[lsllll]

You're not a parent (or a good one), are you?

Re:Define "someone else's" phone

[nwaack]

Good luck with that. You can certainly do whatever the hell you please with it, but your personal feelings on the subject don't count for much in court.

Good luck with that? Good luck finding a judge that would criminally prosecute me for putting a "spy" app on a phone I own with the intent of safeguarding my underage kid from all the horrible stuff out there (aka "parenting" to most).

Re:Define "someone else's" phone

[AF_Cheddar_Head]

(aka "parenting" to most).

AKA being a helicopter parent. Damn glad my parents didn't try to listen in on every phone call I made as a kid and allowed me to play outdoors in 1000 acres of forest without continuous supervision.

Re:Define "someone else's" phone

[Anubis IV]

While the courts may not care that you own the phone, most do care that it's your child. Because a minor isn't capable of providing consent on their own behalf, most courts recognize the notion of "vicarious consent", that is, that the parent can consent on behalf of the child to wiretap the child's phone call. This sort of stuff comes up in divorce cases where one parent wants to tape the calls between a child and another parent.

There's some additional information here: http://scholarship.law.edu/cgi...

Usual disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, I merely play the part of an armchair lawyer when online.

Re:Define "someone else's" phone

[Penguinisto]

Good luck with that. You can certainly do whatever the hell you please with it, but your personal feelings on the subject don't count for much in court.

As a parent? I bought the device, and therefore I own it, not the kid(s). I made that perfectly clear with my own kids in turn when they were growing up... this is not your phone, and not your laptop. They're mine, and I'm lending them to you so that you can prove your increased responsibility to your mother and I. Once the kid was old enough to buy his own phone (and plan!), and his own laptop (and ISP hookup), then he got some privacy from us (outside the home, otherwise, enjoy the transparent proxy on my network).

Until the kid moves out? Nope: my house, my stuff, my rules. I defy you to find a legal precedent that invalidates it.

Re:Define "someone else's" phone

[Luthair]

As the other person mentioned, guardians usually have the power to make decisions for their children. Even without that tell your kid, its a condition of the phone.

Re:Define "someone else's" phone

[blindseer]

It seems to me that those rules are fine in the law, so long as this is made clear from the start. The catch is if this is done in secret or not. If you tell your child that the phone is monitored then it seems nothing is wrong. Where the issue arises is of the "snooping" is done in secret since even children have the right of privacy.

Your policy sounds quite similar to what Dad did with my youngest sister. We lived on a farm far from town and so Dad bought a car so she could get to and from school, after school events, and so forth. He told her that while she had wide latitude on using the car it was not her car, he owned the car and she was merely allowed to use it. I didn't get this "talk" since I'm the middle child and when I had to drive it was often to take myself and my siblings to school or wherever, it was obvious I did not "own" the car. Since she was the last to leave the house this was not so clear as she had no one to share the car with, Dad often drove the truck places and Mom took the "nice" car.

A cell phone is an inherently personal device, people do not often share them especially now that they've become so inexpensive. A parent giving a child a phone and yet claiming ownership might seem as foreign as giving a child a pair of shoes and claiming that the child did not "own" them. Obviously the parent has the ability to dictate certain behaviors. Legally speaking a minor cannot own property. Assuming the clothes would even fit it's unusual for a parent to wear the same clothes as the child.

I can see it like this. A child will be able to go to their bedroom and close the door, and assume they cannot be seen by their parents. If a parent puts a camera in the bedroom, and fails to tell the child it is there, then this can be a problem legally. That's probably a much better analogy than my car or clothes example. That may be your child in your house but you could still be guilty of a crime for snooping on your children in "their" bedroom and not telling them that you might.

Re:Define "someone else's" phone

[rtb61]

You can monitor but you should not secretly monitor. Keep in mind if you are prompted to secretly monitor you children, do no be surprised if that gene is not passed on and they choose to secretly monitor you. Annoy your children enough and don't be surprised when something extremely embarrassing appears online.

Re: Define "someone else's" phone

[koomba]

You say you are justified because they are your devices, so he has no expectation of privacy since you own them. But then you turn around and say that even after he bought his own devices, you still actively snoop on him through monitoring all network traffic? That goes beyond "my device, my rules" and goes firmly in the intrusive spying category. The fact that you can't trust your son even a little, after he's been mature enough to, I assume, get a job and bit his own electronics says volumes about you. All that accomplishes is making him resent you. You're saying to him that you don't trust him period, on principle. Your obsessive paranoia will just teach him to never trust you and never confide in you about anything serious, because your default assumption about him is that he can't be trusted and you have to spy on him. Congratulations on driving a long term wedge between you and your kid.

Re:Define "someone else's" phone

[AmiMoJo]

It's no wonder kids are so happy to hand all their personal details over to Facebook, when they are used to having no privacy.

It's not a good idea to repress their sexuality by denying privacy and this access to sex education material, and yes porn too. It tends not to work out well for them, to be that naive but also horny and repressed by age 18 or even later. Quite unhealthy.

Re:Define "someone else's" phone

[amxcoder]

Isn't this the argument that business use to fire and reprimand people who use company laptops for personal uses? Same with company phones? Either it's the company's or it's the person who they lent it to. Who's device is it?

Aren't businesses allowed to install GPS trackers onto company vehicles and then lend those vehicles out to employees to use for work? And then track the whereabouts of those vehicles all day long to make sure they are at the locations they are supposed to be?

Re:Define "someone else's" phone

[amxcoder]

Didn't school administrators get away with this a couple years back with school laptops that were loaned out to students. While the parents made a big deal out of it, I don't recall ever reading that any administrators or IT staff of the school department were arrested and/ prosecuted for it. I guess it helps to hide behind the mask of a large corp or a government agency, then you don't do jail time for stuff like that.

Re:Define "someone else's" phone

[Solandri]

Trust goes both ways. If you've earned your parents trust enough that they don't feel they have to monitor the phone they bought for you, then good for you. But if they insist on monitoring your phone, they're not violating your trust. It is you who have not yet earned their trust.

Re:Define "someone else's" phone

[allo]

Your boss is paying for your computer AND your work and it's still very limited what he is allowed to install on your pc, when it comes to monitoring tools. And yes, it IS very limited, even when many companies do more than they are allowed to do.

Re: Define "someone else's" phone

[allo]

So we know in which half you're.

Re:Define "someone else's" phone

[amiga3D]

I always presume that if I'm using a device that I don't personally own then it's probably not secure. This includes my AT&T cellphone. It's not really mine even though I paid them for it and I don't trust it. I'd never use it for anything I consider sensitive and this includes banking and credit card activity. To get back to the topic at hand, I'd say that children should be made aware of this fact with electronics. I told my children that my computers were mine and that anything they did on them was subject to my viewing through system logs and such. They were not to use them for anything I wouldn't approve of and that I had access to everything on the box. Where I worked for years had a sticker on all comm equipment including phones that all use was subject to monitoring. That avoids a lot of unpleasantness from the start and anyone caught after that statement needs to be fired anyway.

Re:Define "someone else's" phone

[nwaack]

Yeah. Good luck finding another adult who would label you a parent for replacing your obligation with a fucking app

Wow, you're an idiot and a true coward for insulting me as a parent without logging in. Am I supposed to go to school with them and follow them around 24/7? Moron.

Re:Define "someone else's" phone

[david_thornley]

It seems like lots of adults don't really remember being children, as opposed to smaller and perhaps happier versions of themselves.

Re:Define "someone else's" phone

[Penguinisto]

You're making assumptions here...

Actual sex-ed material I had/have no problem with - the kids had full access to quite a few books on the subject in the house. Pornography on the other hand (esp. the online stuff) tends to warp a kid's mind pretty damned hard by setting the wrong expectations, it generally treats women as objects to be abused at whim and will (instead of as individual human beings), etc. Not exactly something you want the kid to be up against at that age.

Re: Define "someone else's" phone

[Penguinisto]

I said clearly I could do so at any time. Obviously there's nowhere near enough time in the day (or even week) to actively snoop. After awhile, you don't even bother.

As trust is proven, trust is given. Just like the real world.

Depends who owns the phone

[Toshito]

If I'm paying for the phone and the monthly bill, and the phone is registered to my name, I can install whaterver snooping software I want on it.

Not that I would, because for one if my kids want a cellphone they can work and earn enough to pay for it themselves, and two I believe that treating them like real human beings and respecting their privacy is the right thing to do.

Re:Depends who owns the phone

[amiga3D]

I put my teenage son a guest account on my computer back in the 90s so he could do email and school work and surf the web. I told him straight up that I had root access to the computer and not to do anything he didn't want me to know about because I was probably going to look. Had zero problems.

Re: Depends who owns the phone

[Anonymous Coward]

Depends on the situation. My stepdaughter is a real human being but has been caught doing inappropriate and illegal things and plead with us to get her an iPhone. Stipulation being we either get to monitor her remotely or she never ignore our calls or let the phone die without calling us and updating us on what she is doing. To make a long story short she didn't follow the rules because she is a real human being teenager and got raped and has not recovered.

Re:Depends who owns the phone

[geekmux]

If I'm paying for the phone and the monthly bill, and the phone is registered to my name, I can install whaterver snooping software I want on it.

Not that I would, because for one if my kids want a cellphone they can work and earn enough to pay for it themselves, and two I believe that treating them like real human beings and respecting their privacy is the right thing to do.

You might want to review the wiretapping laws before trying to defend yourself by waiving a cell phone bill in the judges face. The laws can be rather horrifying regardless of parental right.

That said, I'm rather glad you respect your children's privacy. We both know as parents trust is earned, and is often not easily restored.

My kids don't own a phone

[Archfeld]

My kids don't have the ability to sign a contract, nor do they own a phone. They are allowed to use one that I own and pay for because they are basically good kids and I love them, but should I choose to listen in on their conversations I reserve that right. Just as I have the right as account holder to track and deactivate the device should I choose. That is part of being a parent, and/or responsible guardian. Do you know where your children are now :)

Re:My kids don't own a phone

[xession]

The point is, if you're a good parent, and have taught your kids well, you shouldn't have to listen to their conversations of surveil them. This poll is a reflection at how weak parents have become. Parents didn't used to have any of these tools and yet society has brought us to this point. Pretty damn sad really.

Re:My kids don't own a phone

[freeze128]

I can just see the Verizon ads now...

"Do you love your kids? Of course you do! That's why you need to give them the new Samsung Galaxy S8!"

Re:My kids don't own a phone

[Archfeld]

If I got mouthy and I did a few times, I got my butt smacked. If a parent tried that today they'd end up in jail with their kids in Child Protective Services. I don't see how a timeout resolves the situation, nor teaches the precious little snowflake a lesson in reality. Children who wander off into the proverbial wilderness get eaten by the big bad wolf, or cooked by the wicked witch. Contemporary children who misbehave get a participation trophy and some form of add/adhd drug...

Re:My kids don't own a phone

[drinkypoo]

The alternative to smacking children is to frighten them by reasoning with them. The world is a frightening place and not telling them the truth about that is doing them a disservice. It is beautiful but it is also dangerous. The PSA with the cardboard child and the steamroller scared me right out of the street and I knew better than to get into a van for FREE CANDY because my parents made it clear to me that some adults want to harm or even kill children.

Re:My kids don't own a phone

[Archfeld]

You have much luck reasoning with a four year old ? When they get a wee bit older you can actually talk with them but I found a firm smack on the butt far more effective at getting their attention and stopping the developing tantrum in its' tracks. Note I am not suggesting routinely beating your children or anything that archaic, but a small show of force lasts a long time and draws a big don't cross line in the proverbial sand.

Re:My kids don't own a phone

[david_thornley]

I found that setting expectations and paying attention to the kid worked just fine. No need for physical punishment. YMMV.

Nope, not illegal

[LeftCoastThinker]

With all that is out there lurking for children to prey upon, you can sure as hell bet that I will be monitoring MY phones that I pay for and I buy service for that I allow my minor children to use. Please point to the US law that makes this illegal because there is not one, it is not a gray area at all. Children only have a small subset of rights, and privacy from monitoring by their parents is not included. That common law goes back hundreds of years in the US and thousands of years before that in Europe.

Re:Nope, not illegal

[linuxrocks123]

That would be state and federal wiretapping statutes. According to this law review article, you're on very thin ice even if you're in a one-party consent state: http://digitalcommons.law.seat...

In a one party state, you'd be relying on the doctrine of "vicarious consent", which parents can sometimes do for children, because of our culture's disgusting history of treating children like subhumans that are their parents' property, and which is exactly as stupid as it sounds. It's also not a slam dunk to win with. Here's a relevant South Carolina Supreme Court ruling setting out the standards for vicarious consent to be applicable in that state: http://www.gregoryforman.com/b...

In a two-party consent state, you're obviously doing something illegal unless the call is between two of your little flowers in the attic.

Re:Nope, not illegal

[LeftCoastThinker]

Sorry, the first article that you cite is looking at the legality to RECORD a phone call, which is not the same as LISTEN to (or as I termed, monitor). Furthermore, even most (or at least my) two party consent states have an exception for citizens recording their calls when there is an expectation that a crime is being committed or will be captured by recording the call. Further, if the common number I have causes my phone to ring when the phone that I have provided to my child also rings and I pick up but stay on mute and listen in, I'm pretty sure that since I was called as well and both phones belong to me and ring when that number is called, there are no issues as long as I don't record the call (it is akin to picking up the extension on my land line). Any adult calling a child should expect zero privacy.

"...our culture's disgusting history of treating children like subhumans that are their parents' property, and which is exactly as stupid as it sounds."

Children are not subhumans, they are sub-adults (thus the term child, meaning immature or irresponsible). Treating children like property was a convenient way of looking at it from the point of law. What would be even stupider would be giving children all the rights of an adult: want to drive at 11yo, sure, here are the keys; want a pistol, sure, here's some ammo; want to kill your liver with alcohol, sure, here's a bottle of Jack Daniels; want to get married, sure, go for it; want to destroy your lungs with smoking (pot or tobacco), sure, take a puff... The reality is that children start off completely dependent on their parents for protection and instruction, and when they become adults, they are (supposed to be) self sufficient and capable of making reasonable, responsible decisions on their own. Before they are adults, children are incapable of making decisions without the supervision and review of their parents, but it is only a digital state (child or adult) in the eyes of the law. In reality, there is a transition that each parent must both meter and foster so that when a child reaches the legal age of adulthood (18 in the US), they are ready for the rights and responsibilities that they inherit. Will I be monitoring my child's phone activity at 17.5? Probably only minimally if at all. Will I be monitoring their phone activity at 12? You bet your ass.

The bare fact remains that no one will love or care for you like your parents. Not the government, and certainly not strangers. Just look at how many children have been abused or died in foster care (government parentage) and the appalling percentage that is compared to biological/adoptive parents. There are exceptions of sociopathic parents, but those are few and far between. The most common examples we see today of children not being cared for by the parents is when the parents are drug or alcohol abusers, which physiologically prevents the natural parenting instincts.

Children are immature and irresponsible by definition, and they need protection and instruction, not power (in the form of adult rights and freedoms). Children need to learn (or at least have the chance to learn) the value and practice of self control, moderation and maturity before they can be trusted with the power that we give every adult in a free society. Giving children power (in the form of rights, freedoms or otherwise) before they are mature warps them and often prevents them from ever becoming mature (see 99% of child stars in the last 40 years)... Anyone who says otherwise is either a child themselves (over or under 18) or an adult who has never had children (and thus is completely ignorant on the real practice of raising children and has no business commenting on the matter.) Child psychologists and "experts" who have never had children crack me up and should never be taken seriously, it is like trying to listen to a college professor teach a programming course without ever having written a single line of code.

Poor example

[dnaumov]

In many countries, parents spying on their underage children, their communications and their location at any time is not only fully legal, it is expected of the parents.

It's not someone else's device...

[Fished]

If you're married, it is generally presumed that things are owned jointly. So, "our" phone.

If it's a child and you are their guardian, it's generally "my phone" even if it was a gift or someone gave it to them.

Re:If a majority say so

[amiga3D]

Hurry up and grab a seat, the show is about to start.

Well...

[Parker Lewis]

... this is what they learned from the gov. agencies in the latest years. It's close to the Soviet Union communism: everyone spying everyone.

Look at all these ninny nannies...

[xession]

I'd bet most of the parents for millenials and older weren't so damn intrusive on the lives of their children. Hell, when I was a kid, most parents seemed to want you to come back or check in maybe every 4 hours at best. And now, parents want their kids in the home and heavily monitored with what they are doing. What gives?

If you're a quality parent, then you should be able to trust your kid until they give a significant reason not to trust you. Monitoring them only encourages learning better sleuthing to get around it. Teach your damn kids what you expect of them up front, enforce it and them trust them to stick to it until they don't. Not being able to trust your kid to do anything without being able to surveil their every move, is a pretty strong reflection on how weak your parenting skills really are.

Re:Look at all these ninny nannies...

[farble1670]

Hell, when I was a kid, most parents seemed to want you to come back or check in maybe every 4 hours at best. And now, parents want their kids in the home and heavily monitored with what they are doing. What gives?

^^^ This guy has it. All things being equal, why not monitor the heck out of your kids? Even if it's a small chance something bad is going to happen, might as well be safe right? No.

The problem is all things aren't equal. By monitoring them, you rob them of the life experience of learning how to deal with things on their own and solve their own problems. Not to mention, you teach them about a big scary world where bad things are lurking around every corner, as opposed to one that's open for them to enjoy and experience.

The benefit you get from removing that minutely small chance they'll be preyed up online (or whatever, I'm honestly at a loss what people think they are protecting their kids from) isn't worth robbing them of life skills.

I guess it depends on the situation...

[Drakonblayde]

For kids it's a no brainer. They don't legally possess property, and they can't legally enter into a contract with a phone provider, which means they need someone else to obtain the device and access to use it for them. As such, just because they happen to use it, doesn't mean they own it, and the owner can do with their property as they see fit.

Same goes for the computers in the house. The kids have their own computers, but I have them heavily locked down in what they can do, both at the individual host level, and the network level.

Once they come of age, I will officially transfer ownership of their devices to them and remove any restrictions or monitoring on them (provided, of course, that they obtain their own cell phone contracts).

Now, if I were to slip some spyware onto my wifes computer or phone, or my mother in law's when she visits, or that deadbeat cousin who crashes with us for a few months before he finds another job, then I'm probably in violation of doing anything to their devices. Their network traffic is still fair game though, since I own and administer the pipes they're using while in my house.

What a repulsive thing to do

[gweihir]

"Legal" does not even come into the picture here. Anybody that is not total scum will immediately see how utterly immoral such an action is.

Re:What a repulsive thing to do

[Narcocide]

Obvious case of the pot calling the kettle black right here. I bet you think you have the right to hit your children too.

My Property

[jimmifett]

Everything in my house is my property. I paid for it, the wife, the kids, the pets, the electronics. If I feel like bugging any of my stuff, no one can do a damn thing about it, except bring me a sandwich, beer, and lay on my lap while I watch the big sportsball game.

Patriarchal screech! REEEEE!

In all seriousness, I'll bug any damn thing I want to bug that I paid money for and is applicable with my state's laws.

Re:Minors

[geekmux]

My kid's phone is mine. It's in my name, I pay for it, and no prosecutor's going to go after me for PARENTING.

If any of you were looking for the legal equivalent of "hold my beer and watch this.", you've found it.

Hell, who needs wiretapping laws, right? I'm sure the judge will take your 'cause-imma-parent defense.

No shame

[AndyKron]

What about advertisers that put spy software in apps? I say put them in prison!

Re:If a majority say so

[thegreatbob]

Welcome back, my friends, to the shitshow that never ends! I'm so glad you could attend! Come inside, come inside!

I knew it!

[Gravis Zero]

American women more likely to spy on partners’ phone and internet activity

I believe this confirms the adage, "bitches be trippin'" ;)

For Coporate "persons" only

[nickmalthus]

Foolish Americans, thinking they can behave the same way as their corporate counterparts. Only in the quest for profits is one idemnified from prosecution for spying, fraud, and theft.

I love this article

[Headw1nd]

Headline - "More Than Half of People Believe Using Spyware To Snoop On Family Members Is Legal, Study Finds"

Article - "Well, it might be"

Re:I love this article

[Narcocide]

Legal precedent on this one actually seems to vary from state-to-state. Also note that it's a federal crime for companies to compile personal identifying information of children under the age of 13. So if you're using a 3rd party data service for this type of spying, on a cellphone contract you've signed yourself for a physical device you then handed to a child under 13...

Re:Misleading...

[Sloppy]

they are *my* phones and I can install any apps I want to

You sound like someone from the 20th century. Sure, you can install whatever software that you want to on your own computers, but..

..it can easily be illegal. Haven't you ever heard of DMCA, for example? For some prohibitions, ownership of subject matter is irrelevant.

Don't like it? Start voting differently. Or just break the law and try to go undetected.

Still illegal in my state (WA)

[WillAffleckUW]

But, hey, it's in our State Constitution.

Not like you care about the Rule of Law, am I right?

Re:Minors

[smelch]

What the fuck is wrong with you? Is grounding kidnapping? Is spanking assault? Is allowance a violation of minimum wage laws? "I'm the child's parent" is a perfectly fine legal defense. Children don't have the same rights that adults do, that's just the way it is.

Re:Misleading...

[PPH]

From TFA:

It is generally illegal to install an app on another person's phone without their knowledge.

So, son. Here's a phone for you. I've installed spyware on it, so watch what you do with it.

most comments are about parents

[superwiz]

This has never been challenged in court (as far as I know), but I am fairly sure (and I a am not a lawyer) that the standard is going to be that if it is legal for you to see the bill, it is legal for you to tap the phone. The phone bill is a protected postal communication. It cannot be legally examined without a warrant by anyone to whom it is not addressed (once it's been delivered, anyway.. not sure about misdelivered mail). And if you can see the bill, you can see the list of all phone calls, so privacy is already breached. Can you record all the calls on the phone if the phone's bill is addressed to you? Can you do it without warning anyone who uses this phone? Well, privacy is, generally speaking, only something one can expect on their property. This remains the case even if one is not aware of this concept. If you two criminals coordinate their stories inside a police car while the cops are out of the car and the conversation is recorded, it's not a violation of their privacy even if the cops had no wiretapping warrant. The same goes for a teenager using a phone which their parents are paying for. Ignorance of their lack of certain rights is not enough for them to gain, by default, those rights.

Re:This is *Never* okay

[Anonymous Coward]

Both of them are under two years of age and growing up in a world filled with predators and other malicious actors

Most of them being their relatives, so it doesn't help.

Quick. Not another moment...

[sonamchauhan]

Ban baby monitors!

Reductio ad absurdum

[sonamchauhan]

Two words: Baby monitor