Girl, 12, 'interrogated' by school staff until she gives up Facebook password

ohiogirl

Active Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2008
Messages
4,974
Reaction score
41
My husband bought home an application that asked him to sign it ,saying at any time during employment with that company they could search his car while he was employed with them.

I pictured men coming into our driveway in the middle of the night to search our car.

was he applying for work with the CIA? lol
 

legalmania

Verified Paralegal
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
3,642
Reaction score
9
Website
www.websleuths.com
My husband bought home an application that asked him to sign it ,saying at any time during employment with that company they could search his car while he was employed with them.

I pictured men coming into our driveway in the middle of the night to search our car.

Did they tell him if he didn't sign it he wouldn't get the job? He may not want to spend the money but I would get an attorneys advice. Personally I would sign it and then just mess with them, like leaving something that looked like blood around the trunk. Or keep adult toys in the trunk, that's just me though.
 

legalmania

Verified Paralegal
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
3,642
Reaction score
9
Website
www.websleuths.com
This law is being broken repeatedly! I know tons of kids under 12 on Facebook. I don't let my children on the Internet. But it appears everyone else does, if you don't believe me, just ask my children.

I know this and Mark Zukenburg thinks that it shouldn't be an issue. Of course after a hacker got a hold of some of his personal pictures he may be rethinking a few things.
 

Soulmagent

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
8,177
Reaction score
3,887
was he applying for work with the CIA? lol

No . But would I really know if my husband worked for the CIA? Is that a
your job is a secret kinda job?

Did they tell him if he didn't sign it he wouldn't get the job? He may not want to spend the money but I would get an attorneys advice. Personally I would sign it and then just mess with them, like leaving something that looked like blood around the trunk. Or keep adult toys in the trunk, that's just me though.


No they didnt say that because I think the wording of the paper work made it clear and virginia being a right to work state(which the application also pointed out) .
 

sherbetjello

Where is Kyron?
Joined
Jun 18, 2010
Messages
2,224
Reaction score
147
So when these children grow up ,they are already trained to not speak up or out agaisnt schools,or goverments or injustice because it may lead to them being punished for substantial disruption (a facebook post) and they may be held indefinitly under some new sci fi terrorist law....:waitasec:

So I know I said this before but ,the school is training our children that the constitution does not apply to them.

These kids are the people who will be the next to stand up for our rights and it looks as if they will not have a clue what those rights are , leaving all of us vulnerable to losing them.JMO.

Awesome, awesome post!
 

gitana1

Verified Attorney
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
28,433
Reaction score
216,079
It's a federal law that a 12 yr old can't be on a social media site. It's called COPPA. Link below. I would say that because she was addressing a staff member that they had a right to see if any threats were mentioned. She also continued to post after the initial punishment.

http://www.allfacebook.com/facebook-age-limit-2011-11

The law doesn't say it is illegal for underaged kids to be on social media. The law says that FB and other social media can't collect personal information about underaged kids. So the social media sites have a policy forbidding underaged members......the kids who join are breaking a policy, not a law.

I realize I am very late to the game but you are very right kgeaux. Here's the relevant part of the text of COPPA:
SEC. 1303. REGULATION OF UNFAIR AND DECEPTIVE ACTS AND PRACTICES IN CONNECTION WITH THE COLLECTION AND USE OF PERSONAL INFORMATION FROM AND ABOUT CHILDREN ON THE INTERNET.
(a) ACTS PROHIBITED.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—It is unlawful for an operator of a website or online service directed to children, or any operator that has actual knowledge that it is collecting personal information from a child, to collect personal information from a child in a manner that violates the regulations prescribed under subsection (b).
(2) DISCLOSURE TO PARENT PROTECTED.—Notwithstanding paragraph (1), neither an operator of such a website or online service nor the operator's agent shall be held to be liable under any Federal or State law for any disclosure made in good faith and following reasonable procedures in responding to a request for disclosure of per-sonal information under subsection (b)(1)(B)(iii) to the parent of a child.
(b) REGULATIONS.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Commission shall promulgate under section 553 of title 5, United States Code, regulations that—
(A) require the operator of any website or online service directed to children that collects personal information from children or the operator of a website or online service that has actual knowledge that it is collecting personal information from a child—
(i) to provide notice on the website of what information is collected from children by the operator, how the operator uses such information, and the operator's disclosure practices for such information; and
(ii) to obtain verifiable parental consent for the collection, use, or disclosure of personal information from children;
(B) require the operator to provide, upon request of a parent under this subparagraph whose child has provided personal information to that website or online service, upon proper identification of that parent, to such par-ent—
(i) a description of the specific types of personal information collected from the child by that operator;
(ii) the opportunity at any time to refuse to permit the operator's further use or maintenance in retrievable form, or future online collection, of personal information from that child; and
(iii) notwithstanding any other provision of law, a means that is reasonable under the circumstances for the parent to obtain any personal information collected from that child;
(C) prohibit conditioning a child's participation in a game, the offering of a prize, or another activity on the child disclosing more personal information than is reasonably necessary to participate in such activity; and
(D) require the operator of such a website or online service to establish and maintain reasonable procedures to protect the confidentiality, security, and integrity of personal information collected from children.
http://www.ftc.gov/ogc/coppa1.htm

Nothing at all in there states children are not allowed to participate in social media sites.
 

LinasK

Verified insider- Mark Dribin case
Joined
Jun 3, 2004
Messages
25,401
Reaction score
12,309
By Mike Rosenberg
[email protected]
Posted: 09/27/2012 03:10:27 PM PDT
Updated: 09/27/2012 04:49:44 PM PDT
SACRAMENTO -- California, home to many of the world's social media companies, now has the nation's strictest privacy laws preventing your boss or college from surfing through the personal information you post on sites like Facebook.
It will be illegal for companies or universities to ask for access to your personal social media or email accounts under two bills signed Thursday by Gov. Jerry Brown.
"The Golden State is pioneering the social media revolution, and these laws will protect all Californians from unwarranted invasions of their personal social media accounts," Brown said in a statement.
Recent accounts of employers asking for personal passwords or requiring applicants to open their Facebook pages during interviews sparked the new laws.
Companies and universities are increasingly trying to keep tabs on workers and students -- and vet prospective hires and admissions -- by monitoring their personal pages like Twitter and Google (GOOG)+ to see if they've posted anything like drunk photos or insensitive comments. But many people block public access to these posts through privacy settings. more at link: http://www.contracostatimes.com/bus...email-passwords-made-private-under-california
 

LinasK

Verified insider- Mark Dribin case
Joined
Jun 3, 2004
Messages
25,401
Reaction score
12,309
By Natasha Singer

New York Times


Posted: 09/27/2012 06:38:43 PM PDT
Updated: 09/27/2012 06:38:43 PM PDT
Federal regulators are about to take the biggest steps in more than a decade to protect children online.
The moves come at a time when major corporations, app developers and data miners appear to be collecting information about the online activities of millions of young Internet users without their parents' awareness, children's advocates say. Some sites and apps have also collected details like the photographs or codes on mobile devices; the concern is that the information could be used to identify or locate individual children.
These data-gathering practices are currently legal. But the development has so alarmed officials at the Federal Trade Commission that the agency is moving to overhaul rules that many experts say have not kept pace with the explosive growth of the Web and innovations like apps. New rules are expected within weeks.<snip> The current federal rule, the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998, requires operators of websites to obtain parental consent before they collect personal information like phone numbers or physical addresses from children under 13. But rapid advances in technology have overtaken the rules, privacy advocates say.
"When we tell parents about this they are appalled, because basically what it's doing is going around the parents' back and taking advantage of kids' naiveté," said Jennifer Harris, the director of marketing initiatives at the Yale Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity. "It's a very unfair and deceptive practice that we don't think companies should be allowed to do."
Under the FTC's proposals, some current online practices, like getting children under 13 to submit photos of themselves, would require parental consent. more at link: http://www.contracostatimes.com/ci_...contracostatimes.com-www.contracostatimes.com
 

i.b.nora

I am polka dot
Joined
Aug 13, 2003
Messages
8,887
Reaction score
382
Website
Visit site
http:///facebook/2012/09/14/us-judg...-demanded-facebook-password-12-year-old-girl/

US Judge rules school violated First Amendment by demanding Facebook password from 12-year-old girl
14th September 2012
By Emil Protalinski
 

kgeaux

New Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2003
Messages
7,598
Reaction score
18
http:///facebook/2012/09/14/us-judg...-demanded-facebook-password-12-year-old-girl/

us judge rules school violated first amendment by demanding facebook password from 12-year-old girl
14th september 2012
by emil protalinski

good!
 

LinasK

Verified insider- Mark Dribin case
Joined
Jun 3, 2004
Messages
25,401
Reaction score
12,309
http:///facebook/2012/09/14/us-judg...-demanded-facebook-password-12-year-old-girl/

US Judge rules school violated First Amendment by demanding Facebook password from 12-year-old girl
14th September 2012
By Emil Protalinski
From the article: First Amendment claims: The court has no trouble concluding that assuming the facts as alleged as true, school officials violated R.S.’s First Amendment rights. The court says that posts on social networks are protected unless they are “true threats” or are reasonably calculated to reach the school environment and pose a safety risk or a risk of substantial disruption of the school environment. R.S.’s posts were not true threats. Even assuming the statements were reasonably calculated to reach the school audience, there was no possibility of disruption.

That's what I said!!!:woohoo::woohoo::woohoo:
 

legalmania

Verified Paralegal
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
3,642
Reaction score
9
Website
www.websleuths.com
In my opinion this shows that the A.C.L.U. is unsure of their position on this case, had they went straight to the Federal court instead of the District Court this case would hold more volume. I have a feeling we have not head the last of this case. It definitely belongs in the Supreme Court. When I went through the many pages of this case, I saw I had a case on April 20 I won that case. Yeah me.
 

RoseRed

Former Member
Joined
May 11, 2008
Messages
1,684
Reaction score
4
http:///facebook/2012/09/14/us-judg...-demanded-facebook-password-12-year-old-girl/

US Judge rules school violated First Amendment by demanding Facebook password from 12-year-old girl
14th September 2012
By Emil Protalinski

:woohoo::woohoo::woohoo: yes, I agree!!!
 

Linda7NJ

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2005
Messages
31,811
Reaction score
7,012
We don't know what was said on FB, so nobody knows why this officer felt he had the right to access her account. We do know she had two detentions for previous FB posts. It will be up to the court to decide whether her first and fourth amendment rights very violated.

I have the feeling people would feel differently if what was asked for was a banking PIN number !

Oh and for the record, her previous two detentions I do not agree with either.
 

LinasK

Verified insider- Mark Dribin case
Joined
Jun 3, 2004
Messages
25,401
Reaction score
12,309
By Zach Epstein | BGR News &#8211; Tue, Jan 1, 2013
New laws that took effect on January 1st, 2013 make it illegal for employers to demand access to their workers&#8217; password-protected Facebook (FB) accounts. After some high-profile instances of companies requiring access to employees&#8217; accounts, Congress was asked to consider a law making such demands illegal on the grounds that they constitute an invasion of privacy. Congress blocked the law, however its decision had no bearing on laws being considered at the state level. Now, California and Illinois have become the first two states to make it expressly illegal for employers to make such demands, Reuters reports. more at link: http://news.yahoo.com/law-makes-illegal-employers-california-illinois-demand-facebook-190557440.html
 

i.b.nora

I am polka dot
Joined
Aug 13, 2003
Messages
8,887
Reaction score
382
Website
Visit site
ACLU wins settlement for sixth-grader's Facebook posting
Article by: CURT BROWN , Star Tribune
Updated: March 25, 2014 - 11:06 PM


ACLU sued Minnewaska school after sixth-grader was forced to give up password.

"In this latest free-speech legal clash between schools and students over murky rules governing social media privacy, Minnewaska Area Schools agreed to pay $70,000 in damages and rewrite its policies to limit how intrusive the school can be when searching a student’s e-mails and social media accounts created off school grounds.

The federal court settlement comes just after Rogers High School senior Reid Sagehorn, a 17-year-old honor student and football captain, was suspended for seven weeks for a two-word Internet posting in a case that created a community uproar.

“A lot of schools, like the folks at Minnewaska, think that just because it’s easier to know what kids are saying off campus through social media somehow means the rules have changed, and you can punish them for what they say off campus,” said attorney Wallace Hilke, who helped lead Riley’s case from the Minnesota branch of the American Civil Liberties Union."

More...

http://www.startribune.com/local/252263751.html?page=all&prepage=1&c=y#continue
 
Top