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)]"

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:

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?


-----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