A 52-year-old Ohio widow has been given the green light to sue Vancouver’s Absolute Software (TSX:ABT) over allegations the Vancouver company, which tracks stolen and lost computers, invaded her privacy by recording sexually explicit images of her as part of its attempts to retrieve a stolen laptop.
On August 22, the Ohio District Court rejected Absolute’s application for a summary judgment that its theft recovery agents acted properly. The decision clears the way for Susan Clements-Jeffrey to sue Absolute for invasion of privacy.
According to the court ruling, Clements-Jeffrey bought a laptop from one of her students for $60 in 2008. It had been stolen from the school district where Clements-Jeffrey worked as a substitute teacher.
The laptop was equipped with LoJack, Absolute’s tracing software, which allows the company’s security team to trace and monitor a computer.
When the computer is logged onto the Internet, LoJack allows Absolute to pinpoint the location of the device and can remotely lock it up, erase files or monitor any communications.
Once the company has an IP address, it can forward the information to police. But in the recent Ohio case, Absolute’s theft recovery officer, Kyle Magnus, went further than that. According to Justice Walter Herbert Rice, Magnus infringed on Clements-Jeffrey’s privacy when he recorded sexually explicit webcasts between her and an old boyfriend she had recently reconnected with.
Magnus also recorded conversations by capturing keystrokes and recorded websites Clements-Jeffrey visited. Magnus took three sexually explicit screen shots of Clements-Jeffrey via the laptop’s webcam while she was chatting with her former boyfriend, according to court documents.
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.
Absolute argued that Clements-Jeffrey should have known the laptop was stolen and therefore had no legitimate expectation of privacy. Rice disagreed.
“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 in his judgment. “It is something entirely different to violate federal wiretapping laws by intercepting the electronic communications of the person using the stolen laptop.”
Rice said Absolute “crossed an impermissible boundary when they intercepted Plaintiffs’ instant messages and webcam communications. A reasonable jury could also find that such conduct would cause a person of ordinary sensibilities to suffer shame and humiliation.”
Absolute’s CEO John Livingston could not be reached for comment. However, a company spokesman told Business in Vancouver “It’s Absolute’s policy not to comment on active legal cases.”
Nelson Bennett
Twitter: nbennett_biv