Badges - Computer web cam, spyware & keystroke monitoring
- From: Charles Rahn <c.t.rahn@xxxxxxxx>
- To: Badges 1Badge <badges@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 16:52:25 -0400
A Pennsylvania federal lawsuit filed May 2 and reported in today?s Washington
Post claims that Aaron?s Inc., a large furniture rental chain store based out
of Atlanta, Georgia, placed spyware on computers they rented to track their
customers? keystrokes, take screenshots and even transmit webcam images of
users at their homes. The case was brought by a young couple, Brian and Crystal
Byrd. The lawsuit is reminiscent of the Lower Merion School District matter
which last year brought about the introduction of anti-surreptitious video
surveillance legislation by then Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter which ISPLA
in Washington worked hard to successfully defeat.
Privacy experts contend that Aaron?s has the right to equip its computers with
such software to shut off the devices remotely if customers stop paying their
bills. However, customers must be notified of such monitoring. ?If I?m renting
a computer ... then I have a right to know what the limitations are and I have
a right to know if they?re going to be collecting data from my computer,? said
Annie Anton, a professor and computer privacy expert with North Carolina State
University.
But the couple who sued Aaron?s said they had no knowledge that the computer
they rented came equipped with a device that could spy on them. It was not
until December 22, 2010 when an Aaron?s manager came to their home to repossess
the computer because he mistakenly believed the Byrds had not paid off their
?rent-to-own? agreement. However, after they produced a paid receipt the
manager showed them a picture of them using the computer that had been taken by
the computer?s webcam.
Aaron?s claims it hasn?t authorized any of its corporate stores to install the
software described in the lawsuit. Police were contacted by the customer who
ascertained the image had been taken by software of Designerware LLC and
installed on all Aaron?s rental computers. Designerware is a codefendant in
this matter. The Byrds leased their computer from an independently owned and
operated franchisee. Aaron?s believes that none of its more than 1,140
company-operated stores had used Designerware?s product or had done any
business with it.
It remains to be seen if the Electronic Communications Privacy Act and the
Computer Fraud and Abuse Act were violated. If either law was broken then
Aaron?s went too far.
Former FTC Commissioner, Peter Swire, an Ohio State professor, is quoted in an
AP item that using a software "kill switch" is legal because companies can
protect themselves from fraud and other crimes. "But this action sounds like
it's stretching the self-defense exception pretty far," he said, because the
software "was gathering lots of data that isn't needed for self-protection."
He is also quoted as indicating the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act "prohibits
unauthorized access to my computer over the Internet. The renter here didn't
authorize this kind of access."
Fred Cate, an information law professor at Indiana University agrees that
consent is required but said the real question might be: "Whose consent?"
Courts have allowed employers to record employee phone calls because the
employers own the phones. Similar questions arise as digital technology becomes
more omnipresent, Cate said. "We always talk about deterrence value. Well it
doesn't make sense to put (the software) on there" without telling people what
it can do," according to Cate. "That's why we all put alarm signs in front of
our houses, even if we don't have alarms."
According to the lawsuit, components were soldered into the computer's
motherboard or otherwise physically attached to the PC's electronics. It can
only be uninstalled and deactivated using a wand. John Robinson, the
plaintiffs? attorney, indicated the computer is currently held as police
evidence. His clients want the federal court to declare their case a class
action and are seeking unspecified damages and attorneys' fees. They contend
the privacy act allows for a penalty of $10,000 or $100 per day per violation,
plus punitive damages and other costs.
PRNewswire released an Aaron's, Inc. item that the lawsuit regarding a
violation of privacy relating to a computer rented from an Aaron's franchise
store is without merit against Aaron's, Inc.
?The Company believes that none of its over 1,140 Company-operated stores have
used the product developed or provided by PC Rental Agent or Designerware LLC,
the two vendors named in the lawsuit, and neither vendor is approved or have
done any business with Aaron's, Inc.
?Aaron's, Inc. respects its customers' privacy and has not authorized any of
its corporate stores to install software that can activate a customer's webcam,
capture screenshots, or track keystrokes. The named plaintiffs leased the
computer at issue from an independently owned and operated franchisee.
Aaron's, Inc. intends to vigorously defend itself against these allegations.
Aaron's, Inc. has company-operated and franchised stores in 48 states and
Canada. It also manufactures furniture and bedding at 12 facilities in seven
states. Information related above is a compilation of reports from the
Washington Post, Associated Press, PRNewswire, the American Bar Association,
and ISPLA privacy reference material.
ISPLA expects that this revelation, along with recent coverage of Internet
tracking by Google, and several Congressional hearings scheduled for next week,
will keep our profession busy during the 112th Congress.
__,_._,___
The Badges Law Enforcement Discussion Group - Est. 1997
Other related posts:
- » Badges - Computer web cam, spyware & keystroke monitoring - Charles Rahn
