Print

Print


there is also a legal term "in plain sight"
the plain-sight rule says

"Plain sight rule is a principle of criminal law that permits a police
officer to seize without warrant and use as evidence any item seen in plain
view from a lawful position or during a legal search when the officer has
probable cause to believe that the item is evidence of a crime.
The "plain sight" rule recognizes that no citizen has a reasonable
expectation of privacy with respect to unconcealed items within a vehicle
in police custody.[State v. Gowans, 500 P.2d 641 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1972)]"
http://definitions.uslegal.com/p/plain-sight-rule/

if a police officer sees some illegal activity or illegal item in plain
sight - say through a window from the street or in a car - they can act
upon what they see

so if the school staff member is acting as the legal agent based on some
information of suspected misbehavior
and the standard procedure is examine the computer, including the browser
history for inappropriate behavior, and when clicking on the netflix
history record it opens netflix (saved password) and shows an inappropriate
movie has just been or is being viewed - the plain sight rule might apply

if the school staff member explores further into the netflix account - that
might be going beyond plain sight - or it could be legal under just cause
to investigate behavior on school equipment

i'm not a lawyer - i just play one on my laptop...


On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 2:35 PM, John Peters <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> From Cornell Law Schools website on the Fourth Amendment:
> http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fourth_amendment.
>
> The law treats staff and faculty members of public educational insitutions
> as agents of the government. Therefore, the Fourth Amendment applies to
> public school employees, but a less stringent standard prevails. In the
> context of public school searches, employees may perform a search on the
> condition that they have reasonable suspicion. Reasonable suspicion
> requires a rationale basis upon which to believe that a student possesses
> contraband or has committed a crime. Hunches, rumors, or guesses do not
> constitute reasonable suspicion.
>
> Since one of the tenants of 1:1 is more parental involvement and if the
> parent believed they had an expectation of privacy on the account, this
> could present a slippery slope. The argument could be made that it is like
> an apartment. I may own the apartment but if I rent it for a length of time
> to a tenant, the tenant has a reasonable expectation of privacy for the
> duration of the lease.   I think I would consult administration and
> possibly a lawyer since possession of a movie may not be considered
> contraband or evidence of a crime by a court, if it comes to that.
>
> John Peters
> Director of Technology
> North Country Supervisory Union
> 338 Highland Ave Suite#4
> Newport, VT 05855
> 802.334.5847 ext 2018
> [log in to unmask]
>
> Please note my new email address and add it to your contacts
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: School Information Technology Discussion [mailto:
> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Raymond Ballou
> Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 1:41 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Another AUP issue
>
> its a school machine, why WOULDNT the school have the right to search it?
>
> just like lockers and even cars on premises if something is in plain sight.
>
> Is the parent concerned that
> -the school violated netflix's AUP?
> -the school invaded the student's privacy?
> -that the student got in trouble.
>
> what led the employee to check on netflix?
>
>
> R
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Do you know if school personnel have the legal right to access an
> unprotected parent/student personal account on a 1-1 school device, no
> matter what an AUP states about inappropriate use?
>



-- 
george 8-)> raynak
technology director
franklin nw supervisory union
100 robin hood drive
swanton, vt 05488
p 802 868-4967 x14
c 802 393-1787