Couple Can Sue Laptop-Tracking Company for Spying on Sex Chats

[DainBramaged]

U.S. District Judge Walter Rice ruled last week against Absolute Software, which provides software and services for tracking stolen computers. Absolute sought a summary judgment in its favor, insisting that one of its theft recovery agents acted properly when he captured sexually explicit images of Susan Clements-Jeffrey communicating via webcam with her boyfriend and passed them to police in an effort to recover the stolen computer.

But the judge found that there were grounds to believe Absolute had gone too far, and that a jury might reasonably decide that it had violated the plaintiffs’ privacy and broken the law. The case raises an important issue about the length that someone can legally go to recover stolen goods.

“It is one thing to cause a stolen computer to report its IP address or its geographical location in an effort to track it down,” Rice wrote in his decision (.pdf). “It is something entirely different to violate federal wiretapping laws by intercepting the electronic communications of the person using the stolen laptop.”

The case revolves around a laptop that Clements-Jeffrey, a substitute teacher, bought from one of her students in 2008.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/08/absolute-sued-for-spying/

[PCIntern]

1. Having had a family member who has been the victim of a similar crime,

as many know around here, I hope this company's insurance has to pay huge restitution.

And, as always, this thread is useless without pictures....

On a more serious note, it is not necessarily a shame that someone who thought that this kind of tracking and abuse is no longer around here. As I said, "not necessarily a shame".

[joshcryer]

2. Mixed feelings on this one.

On one hand it's your property so you should be able to install whatever software you want on it (that is within the confines of the law).

On the other hand I don't like the idea of "agents" running around gathering information about people via that software so I think it's effectively a dirty practice. If you install said software you, and only you, should be allowed access to it (like those "stolen iPhone" apps that you can use to track your iPhone down, etc).

And finally I actually like this in a way because now does this begin to set a precedent for social networking and data mining? After all, Absolute merely mined data from said computer to glean more information about it and to provide a service!

[MADem]

3. I think the teacher needs to sue the little shit who sold him the stolen computer!

The people who owned the computer, and who installed the software on it, did so solely to protect their property. The kid who stole the computer is the asshole, here. The teacher and his paramour whose privacy was violated were the victims of the thief who lied, not the software company.

You can sue a ham sandwich if you'd like. I don't know if this case will come to a happy result for the couple whose privacy was violated. The software did its job for the person who purchased it. They were dupes, but they were dupes because a thief lied, not because a software company targeted them for no good reason.

The sexy couple really need to go after the bastard who put them in this fix in the first place--the thief who lied.