Feb 282017
 February 28, 2017  Posted by  Breaches, U.S., Youth & Schools

CBS reports:

 Concord high school administrator was the victim in a scandal Monday after a nude video illegally taken by a student inside a locker room at a private club was distributed on social media.

Outside Clayton Valley Charter High School, Monday afternoon, confused parents approached KPIX 5 cameras waiving suspension slips for their children looking for answers.

The teens are accused of distributing a nude photo still from a video of Clayton Valley Charter High School Executive Director David Lindzey. The video was taken in an off-campus locker room at a private club in Walnut Creek.

Read more on CBS.

It’s somewhat disturbing to me that some parents may be minimizing this – and that some students are also only concerned for themselves:

Parents said they were not getting much information from administrators. They feel as though their students were being singled out.

“You cannot tell me out of all the kids here at school, only five sent it to somebody,” said one parent.

“Right around fourth period, everyone had it on their phone,” said student Jacob Aviola, whose sister was suspended for five days for having the picture on her phone.

Most students agree sending the picture was wrong, but they’re worried about the lack of information coming out of the main office.

“We’re just worried about our rights as students,” said one teen who attends Clayton Valley High.

Seriously: not one of the parents expressed outrage over the violation of the man’s privacy and said they’d take their kid out to the wood shed for violating his privacy this way? Or did CBS just not interview any parents who felt that way?  And didn’t any students feel that suspensions were in order?

C’mon folks. If this photo was being sent around while on school premises, this is a no-brainer. If it was sent from phones at home, then I agree it may be a tackier issue for school discipline, but can we get priorities straight here on who was the victim?

Update: NBC reports:

An East Bay high school student who authorities say recorded and distributed nude images of a school administrator was arrested Tuesday and faces possible criminal charges, according to the Contra Costa County Sheriff’s Office.

The 17-year-old student at Clayton Valley Charter High School in Concord was expelled Monday, and several other students were suspended after the images of administrator David Linzey were shared. County sheriff’s deputies say the student violated privacy laws.

Read more on NBC, where you can see the school’s policy on cyberbullying, too. That some students reportedly feel that the punishment for sharing the photo (student suspensions) has gone too far tells me that some of these kids still just don’t get it.  My only question would be whether the sharing was done while on school premises or off school premises. But that’s another legal aspect, I think.

Feb 282017
 February 28, 2017  Posted by  Breaches, Featured News, Non-U.S.

Can an Australian government agency disclose someone’s personal information to refute criticisms?  Christopher Knaus and Paul Farrell report:

Releasing an individual’s Centrelink information to counter their public criticism is legally a “very debatable” move, welfare advocates have said after the public disclosure of welfare recipient Andie Fox’s personal history.

The government has come under fire for releasing Fox’s personal information to Fairfax Media, which used it to counter her public criticism of Centrelink.

The Department of Human Services said it was legally permitted to release such information to correct the public record under social security law but the National Social Security Rights Network questioned the legality of the disclosures.

Read more on The Guardian.

Feb 282017
 February 28, 2017  Posted by  Laws

AP reports:

Gun owners’ rights advocates are free to publish the home addresses and telephone numbers of California state lawmakers who voted for firearms restrictions, a federal judge decided Monday.

It is the second time in a week that judges decided that California lawmakers went too far in protecting the private information of public figures.

U.S. Chief District Judge Lawrence O’Neill of Fresno issued a preliminary injunction Monday blocking a state law that lets public officials demand that their private information be removed from the internet if they fear for their safety or the safety of their families.

O’Neill ruled that the state law is too broad and violates the advocates’ free speech rights. Publishing the lawmakers’ personal information “is a form of political protest,” he said in a 38-page opinion.

Read more on CBS.

Feb 282017
 February 28, 2017  Posted by  Featured News, Laws, Non-U.S., Surveillance

Yonah Jeremy Bob reports:

The Knesset late on Monday approved a landmark law by a 39-to-29 vote limiting the use of biometric databases for smartcard identification, following its passage by the Knesset Constitution, Law and Justice Committee in its final readings.

The law’s final version reflects a number of compromises made to address privacy concerns that have made it the center point of a grand battle for years.

Although compromises were made, there are still concerns.

The law also includes an option to delete fingerprint data for anyone who already gave their permission to access that data.

Fingerprints for those under the age of 16 will not be included in the database and the police cannot use the database for law enforcement purposes until the Knesset approves related regulations on the issue.

Read more on The Jerusalem Post. Also see the coverage on Times of Israel.