Winnie Smithv.

Heartland Computers, Inc.

&Storebror Tech Services, Inc.

A case about the Right to Privacy

Case Summary

Ingram, Iowa

Case Summary

IngSoc High School

Case Summary

IngSoc High School

Case Summary

PRINCIPAL – Hayden O’Brien

IngSoc High School

Case Summary

PRINCIPALHayden O’Brien

IT PERSON– Sydney Ampleforth

IngSoc High School

Case Summary

PRINCIPALHayden O’Brien

IT PERSONSydney Ampleforth

TYPICAL PARENT (PTO) – Morgan Parsons

Case Summary

PRINCIPAL

IT PERSON PARENT

Case Summary

PRINCIPAL

IT PERSON PARENT

Case Summary

Heartland Computers, Inc.

Case Summary

Heartland Computers, Inc.CEO– Reese Charrington

Case Summary

CEOPRINCIPAL

Case Summary

Case Summary

Case Summary

(1) Computer is school property – like a textbook

(2) Computer stays at school unless you pay $60 insurance fee

(3) Computer has tracking software on it which will be activated if lost or stolen

Case Summary

STUDENT – Winnie Smith

Case Summary

STUDENT – Winnie Smith

Case Summary

STUDENT – Winnie Smith

Where’s my laptop?Ummm…Dude, I think someone must have stolen it or something…

Case Summary

Case Summary

Case Summary

Case Summary

EMPLOYEE– Eric(a) Blair

Case Summary

Case Summary

STUDENT – Winnie Smith

Dude, I think someone’staking pictures of me. What should I do about it?GOT IT!Fake bomb threat!

Case Summary

PRINCIPAL – Hayden O’Brien

STUDENT – Winnie Smith

Case Summary

PRINCIPAL – Hayden O’Brien

STUDENT – Winnie Smith

Case Summary

PRINCIPAL – Hayden O’Brien

STUDENT – Winnie Smith

The Question

Is it ALL GOOD because the students signed documents and knew that their laptops were school property?

The Question

Is it ALL GOOD because the students signed documents and knew that their laptops were school property?

Is it ALL BAD (and creepy) because no one would reasonably have expected the school to be taking photos of them in their rooms under any circumstances?

The LawThree Causes of Action:

[1] Invasion of Privacy(a)(b)(c)(d)

[2] Interception of Communication(a)(b)

[3] Identity Theft(a)(b)(c)(d)

The LawThree Causes of Action:

[1] Invasion of Privacy(a) State actor(b) Intrusion upon another’s solitude, seclusion, private affairs or

concerns(c) Intrusion is intentional or knowing(d) Intrusion is one that would be highly offensive to reasonable person

[2] Interception of Communication(a)(b)

[3] Identity Theft(a)(b)(c)(d)

The LawThree Causes of Action:

[1] Invasion of Privacy(a) State actor(b) Intrusion upon another’s solitude, seclusion, private affairs or

concerns(c) Intrusion is intentional or knowing(d) Intrusion is one that would be highly offensive to reasonable person

The Law

Citizens

Government

The Law

Citizens

Citizens

Government

Corporations

The LawThree Causes of Action:

[1] Invasion of Privacy(a) State actor(b) Intrusion upon another’s solitude, seclusion, private affairs or

concerns(c) Intrusion is intentional or knowing(d) Intrusion is one that would be highly offensive to reasonable person

State County

County School System

Contracted Corp.

The LawThree Causes of Action:

[1] Invasion of Privacy(a) State actor(b) Intrusion upon another’s solitude, seclusion, private affairs or

concerns(c) Intrusion is intentional or knowing(d) Intrusion is one that would be highly offensive to reasonable person

Privacy implies that something private has been invaded. You can’t claim that something you do in public is private. Thus, this picture is not an invasion of privacy.

The LawThree Causes of Action:

[1] Invasion of Privacy(a) State actor(b) Intrusion upon another’s solitude, seclusion, private affairs or

concerns(c) Intrusion is intentional or knowing(d) Intrusion is one that would be highly offensive to reasonable person

The invasion must be intentional, it cannot be accidental.

The LawThree Causes of Action:

[1] Invasion of Privacy(a) State actor(b) Intrusion upon another’s solitude, seclusion, private affairs or

concerns(c) Intrusion is intentional or knowing(d) Intrusion is one that would be highly offensive to reasonable person

The LawThree Causes of Action:

[1] Invasion of Privacy(a) State actor(b) Intrusion upon another’s solitude, seclusion, private affairs or

concerns(c) Intrusion is intentional or knowing(d) Intrusion is one that would be highly offensive to reasonable person

[2] Interception of Communication(a) A person willingly uses the contents of a communication(b) The person has reason to know the communication is intercepted

[3] Identity Theft(a)(b)(c)(d)

The LawThree Causes of Action:

[2] Interception of Communication(a) A person willingly uses the contents of a communication(b) The person has reason to know the communication is intercepted

The word “use” does NOT require that the information is used in part of an elaborate plan. “Use” in this context just means: personal use, such as viewing information or disseminating information.

The LawThree Causes of Action:

[2] Interception of Communication(a) A person willingly uses the contents of a communication(b) The person has reason to know the communication is intercepted

The person must have reason to know the communication was intercepted. If the person has no reason to believe that the communication was intercepted, then s/he is not liable under the law.

Hmm, that e-mail I just got seems fishy. I’ll bet it was

intercepted and then forwarded to me.

Hmm, that e-mail I just got seems fishy. I’ll bet it was

intercepted and then forwarded to me.

The LawThree Causes of Action:

[2] Interception of Communication(a) A person willingly uses the contents of a communication(b) The person has reason to know the communication is intercepted

IMPORTANT!A person who gives actual consent to a communication being intercepted CANNOT claim that they were the victim of an intercepted communication.

Thus, one argument for the defense is that the STUDENTS consented to being tracked.

The LawThree Causes of Action:

[1] Invasion of Privacy(a) State actor(b) Intrusion upon another’s solitude, seclusion, private affairs or

concerns(c) Intrusion is intentional or knowing(d) Intrusion is one that would be highly offensive to reasonable person

[2] Interception of Communication(a) A person willingly uses the contents of a communication(b) The person has reason to know the communication is intercepted

[3] Identity Theft(a) Personal identification(b) Is unlawfully accessed(c) And then used or use is attempted(d) To obtain goods, services, or other benefits

The LawThree Causes of Action:

[3] Identity Theft(a) Personal identification(b) Is unlawfully accessed(c) And then used or use is attempted(d) To obtain goods, services, or other benefits

The LawThree Causes of Action:

[3] Identity Theft(a) Personal identification(b) Is unlawfully accessed(c) And then used or use is attempted(d) To obtain goods, services, or other benefits

OK NOT OK

The LawThree Causes of Action:

[3] Identity Theft(a) Personal identification(b) Is unlawfully accessed(c) And then used or use is attempted(d) To obtain goods, services, or other benefits

Dude, I swear this is me. And I would like some beer, please.

The LawThree Causes of Action:

[1] Invasion of Privacy(a) State actor(b) Intrusion upon another’s solitude, seclusion, private affairs or

concerns(c) Intrusion is intentional or knowing(d) Intrusion is one that would be highly offensive to reasonable person

[2] Interception of Communication(a) A person willingly uses the contents of a communication(b) The person has reason to know the communication is intercepted

[3] Identity Theft(a) Personal identification(b) Is unlawfully accessed(c) And then used or use is attempted(d) To obtain goods, services, or other benefits

The End