Privacy violation

Hmnmm, wonder if this one is a privacy violation.

According to the filings in Blake J Robbins v Lower Merion School District (PA) et al, the laptops issued to high-school students in the well-heeled Philly suburb have webcams that can be covertly activated by the schools' administrators, who have used this facility to spy on students and even their families. The issue came to light when the Robbins's child was disciplined for "improper behavior in his home" and the Vice Principal used a photo taken by the webcam as evidence.

Follow the link to find the class action filing against the school.

Incitement?

Does this constitute incitement under Brandenburg?

Microchips, religion, and privacy

The Virginia House has a bill to ban involuntary implantation of micro-chips in people.

Del. Mark L. Cole (R-Fredericksburg), the bill's sponsor, said that privacy issues are the chief concern behind his attempt to criminalize the involuntary implantation of microchips. But he also said he shared concerns that the devices could someday be used as the "mark of the beast" described in the Book of Revelation.

"My understanding -- I'm not a theologian -- but there's a prophecy in the Bible that says you'll have to receive a mark, or you can neither buy nor sell things in end times," Cole said. "Some people think these computer chips might be that mark."

Cole said that the growing use of microchips could allow employers, insurers or the government to track people against their will and that implanting a foreign object into a human being could also have adverse health effects.

"I just think you should have the right to control your own body," Cole said.
ad_icon

The religious overtones have cast the debate into a realm that has made even some supporters uneasy and caused opponents to mock the bill for legislating the apocalypse.

Indecency in musical form

Eric Idle took up the FCC indecency regulations issue with a short song that some people find amusing. Warning: it is meant to be indecent so it does contain a good deal of profanity. Ummm, it contains only profanity, so don't listen near your mom or if you don't find that sort of thing amusing. In any event, it is an illustration of the way in which indecent songs might be intended as a contribution to political debate.

Free speech challenge to Patriot Act provision

There is an important first amendment challenge to the Patriot Act prohibition on material support for "terrorist organizations." The quotes around "terrorist organizations" indicate that this is the real issue in the case, can the government simply declare that non-violent aid to any of a list of organizations constitutes material support for terrorism, or are there protected forms of advice, consulting, or association that are swept up in the law? Are donations to some groups on the list which may have only a tenuous connection to terror activities protected by free speech as campaign contributions are?

The Supreme Court will soon hear Mr. Fertig’s challenge to the law, in a case that pits First Amendment freedoms against the government’s efforts to combat terrorism. The case represents the court’s first encounter with the free speech and association rights of American citizens in the context of terrorism since the Sept. 11 attacks — and its first chance to test the constitutionality of a provision of the USA Patriot Act.

Opponents of the law, which bans providing “material support” to terrorist organizations, say it violates American values in ways that would have made Senator Joseph R. McCarthy blush during the witch hunts of the cold war.

Ellsberg at the Oscars

Daniel Ellsberg, a key figure in the Pentagon Papers case that we studied last week, is the subject of an Oscar nominated documentary. Here is a bit of information about what Ellsberg is up to these days and some of his favorite movies of the last year.

Educational privacy or informational lockdown

A small college in Florida requires every faculty member, staff person, and administrator to sign a very stringent confidentiality agreement that apparently prohibits them from discussing anything that happens on campus. Is this about privacy, or about control over information? Does this protect employee or student privacy, or does it protect the administration of the college from criticism and chill public debate about campus policies?

The Edward Waters agreement, revised this month, is mandatory and classifies all on-campus material as confidential data. That includes employee records, policy documents and even in-class material unless otherwise approved for release.

Faculty, staff and administrators are all included, and any violations can be met with a daily $5,000 fine and additional legal action.