3 ms·

One reason the furor over this died down so quickly is that different stories reported the facts differently. My friends and I all debated what had really happe

One reason the furor over this died down so quickly is that different stories reported the facts differently. My friends and I all debated what had really happened. The student believed the webcam had taken pictures of him acting inappropriate without his knowledge or consent (and no parents were notified of this 'feature' of school-provided laptops). However, it was not clear in initial reports if the student had actually done something and was spied on, or if he had taken pictures and shared them in school. Some schools have policies where students can be disciplined for violations off school grounds in instances of bullying or disseminating "ssext messages" from their peers. It was not clear, from the reporting, if this was the case. The fact that the media is now reporting the facts, and the schools thought it was actually a good idea to spy on high school students in their own homes, shows a kind of unparalleled stupidity in both a legal standpoint and technological one. Also, considering the statistic on how many children of the ages 14-18 "sext" one another, this software, the school's servers, the IT staff and the administrators could all be considered to be part of a child pornography network, if in fact any of those kids decided to "privately model" for another student using their laptop. Aside from the civil aspect of it, I would be contacting my state's AG to investigate whether or not any of those laws were broken.

ErrantX 17y ago
> the school's servers, the IT staff and the administrators could all be considered to be part of a child pornography network No, please lets not go to that silly place. It detracts from the real child pornography issues. We don't need CP laws to convict these people of a crime; the crime they have actually committed. If the administrator was taking pictures of them nude or in sexual positions and then storing them; i.e. with the intent of viewing them sexually, then nail him. But otherwise this is well covered by voyeurism law. A much more appropriate charge.

ErrantX 17y ago

> the school's servers, the IT staff and the administrators could all be considered to be part of a child pornography network No, please lets not go to that silly place. It detracts from the real child pornography issues. We don't need CP laws to convict these people of a crime; the crime they have actually committed. If the administrator was taking pictures of them nude or in sexual positions and then storing them; i.e. with the intent of viewing them sexually, then nail him. But otherwise this is well covered by voyeurism law. A much more appropriate charge.