![]() Rice said Absolute “crossed an impermissible boundary when they intercepted Plaintiffs’ instant messages and webcam communications. “It is something entirely different to violate federal wiretapping laws by intercepting the electronic communications of the person using the stolen laptop.” “It is one thing to cause a stolen computer to report its IP address or its geographical location in an attempt to track it down,” he wrote. She sued both Absolute and the Springfield police.Ībsolute argued that Clements-Jeffrey should have known the laptop was stolen and therefore had no legitimate expectation of privacy. When Springfield, Ohio, police showed up to arrest her for possessing stolen property (the charges were dropped), they brandished the lewd photos Absolute had provided. He also took three sexually explicit screen shots of Clements-Jeffrey while she was chatting with her former boyfriend. Magnus also recorded computer keystrokes and websites Clements-Jeffrey had visited. But in the recent Ohio case, Absolute’s theft recovery officer, Kyle Magnus, went further than that.Īccording to Justice Walter Herbert Rice, Magnus infringed on Clements-Jeffrey’s privacy when he recorded sexually explicit web chats between her and an old boyfriend she had recently reconnected with. Once the company has the IP address, it can forward the information to police. When the computer is used to log on to the Internet, Absolute’s security unit can identify the IP address and can remotely lock it up, erase files or monitor any communications. The school district that owned the device had a contract with Absolute to protect its computer with LoJack for Laptops, which allows Absolute to trace and monitor a lost or stolen computer. She was able to have the operating system restored. The hard drive had been wiped clean, which is why she thought it was being sold so cheaply. She claimed she was unaware that the laptop had been stolen from the school district where she worked as a substitute teacher. The decision cleared the way for Clements-Jeffrey to sue for invasion of privacy.Īccording to the written judgment, Clements-Jeffrey bought a laptop from one of her students for $60 in 2008. On August 22, the Ohio District Court rejected Absolute’s application for a summary judgment that its theft recovery agent acted properly when he recorded Clements-Jeffrey naked as part of its investigation. However, a company spokesman told Business in Vancouver, “It’s Absolute’s policy not to comment on active legal cases.” The trial was slated to begin September 12.Ībsolute CEO John Livingston did not return calls. On September 6, the woman and Absolute reportedly reached an out-of-court settlement for an undisclosed amount. ![]() (TSX:ABT) – over allegations the company invaded her privacy when it recorded sexually explicit images of her as part of its attempts to retrieve a stolen laptop. ![]() – the American subsidiary of Vancouver-based Absolute software Corp. Susan Clements-Jeffrey, a 52-year-old Ohio woman, was given the green light August 22 to sue Absolute Software Inc. It also demonstrates how ill-equipped traditional law enforcement is when it comes to computer-related crime. against a Vancouver-headquartered company that makes computer tracing software underscores how easy it is to invade someone’s privacy in the digital age.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |