Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Businesses Privacy IT

Consumerist Catches Geek Squad Stealing Porn 686

mekane8 writes "Consumer-advocate blog Consumerist ran a sting operation to catch a Best Buy Geek Squad member searching for and stealing media files from a customer's computer. The article includes the story with screen captures and a video of the technician's actions. From that piece: 'Reached for comment, Geek Squad CEO Robert Stephens expressed desire to launch an internal investigation and said, "If this is true, it's an isolated incident and grounds for termination of the Agent involved." This is not just an isolated incident, according to reports from Geek Squad insiders alleging that Geek Squad techs are stealing porn, images, and music from customer's computers in California, Texas, New Jersey, Virginia and elsewhere. Our sources say that some Geek Squad locations have a common computer set up where everyone dumps their plunder to share with the other technicians.' A related story from a former Geek Squad employee details the decline of the Geek Squad and Best Buy ethics in general."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Consumerist Catches Geek Squad Stealing Porn

Comments Filter:
  • by winkydink ( 650484 ) * <sv.dude@gmail.com> on Friday July 06, 2007 @04:23PM (#19772443) Homepage Journal
    Are you kidding me? You expect these people, who are the low-paid,
    bottom-of-the-IT-food-chain to have ethics? Why are they any different
    from a parking lot attendant or car wash guy? Because they're techies?
    Don't kid yourself.

    Heck, at two companies I've worked for (both big-name, publicly traded),
    they've caught (and fired) one or more sysadmins reading other people's
    email.

    Sadly, The Ethical IT Guy is on the verge of becoming a quaint holdover
    from the previous century.

    Encrypt it, or lose it.
  • by CajunArson ( 465943 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @04:28PM (#19772529) Journal
    Hold on, my hypocrisy meter just went red.....
        If this was any of you guys downloading stuff off Bittorrent all we'd here is "It's NOT STEALING WAAHH!!!"
    However, now if the guys at GeekSquad do the exact same thing it's now 'stealing'....
    So what you are saying is that if I get something from Bittorrent over my comparatively slow link that's not stealing, but being efficient about it (which these guys seem to be) is now 'stealing'. Check.

        Oh, and don't even try that: 'But on Bittorrent it's OK since I have permission' bit with me, unless you yourself made the content (and for the love of God I hope it ain't Porn), your 'permission' is about as relevant as me giving you 'permission' to buy the Brooklyn Bridge.
  • by Applekid ( 993327 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @04:34PM (#19772633)

    Are you kidding me? You expect these people, who are the low-paid,
    bottom-of-the-IT-food-chain to have ethics? Why are they any different
    from a parking lot attendant or car wash guy? Because they're techies?
    Don't kid yourself.

    All persons should aspire to live their lives ethically. Rather than have those who do be the exception, it ought to be that those that don't are the exception.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 06, 2007 @04:35PM (#19772649)
    The issue isn't GS guys stealing a customer's porn. It's the tech stealing the customer's HOME MADE porn.
    Like pictures of the customer and his gf getting it on, for example.

    That's quite a bit different.
  • Maybe there's a level below -1, but I don't see any whining posts.

    If someone wants to copy my \music\mp3 directory, more power to them. But, as another person posted, if they go into my \documents\creative_writing I'd be a bit ticked. I'll admit that. Mostly because unlike the music directory, none of the stuff in there is for public consumption. Also, the mp3 directory is 100% reproducible from public networks. It's already out there. Them taking a copy of all my mp3s is just a way for them to save time and bandwidth. My personal files, on the other hand, aren't.

    Of course, as a use case this isn't likely, because I wouldn't buy a computer from Best Buy, let alone entrust them with repairing my box. (And of course, I can fix my own damn computer, so...)

    This isn't a matter of stealing or copyright or anything like that. It's an invasion of privacy. Best Buy is giving you a contract (both social and written) saying that they respect you private data, and that you can trust them. If their employees root around in stuff they shouldn't, that's a breach of privacy.

    Plus, it's a chance to lay down a strawman beat on Best Buy, and who wants to pass up that opportunity?

  • Cuts both ways (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Applekid ( 993327 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @04:46PM (#19772803)
    Insterestingly enough, a while back on that same blog, there was an article about how Geek Squad snooping around some customer's computer revealed he had child porn [consumerist.com].

    While computer repair regulations don't exist like, say, auto repair regulations do, at the time I wondered if it would become compulsory for a computer repair shop to search and disclose child porn and similar because won't someone please think of the children.

    If you have a safety deposit box at a bank, you're entrusting them not to open it while you're away and look at all the sparklies. If you take your clothes to a cleaner, you entrust them not to wear it out on the town ala. Seinfeld. If you get your car fixed, you entrust them not to wade through those papers in your glove compartment and snicker at that condom from 1974. I think it's a reasonable expectation that you'll have files not related to your problem remain unexamined.

    Were it my repair shop, the first thing I'd think of is "wow, we're so not busy right now my employee has the time to search for goodies on client computers?"
  • by plague3106 ( 71849 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @04:46PM (#19772811)
    What does being low paid or at the bottom of a social class have to do with acting morally? Are you saying its ok for poor people to steal, lie and cheat?
  • by JumperCable ( 673155 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @04:46PM (#19772813)
    Look. Most comments aren't seeing the picture here. It's not the copying of some 3rd party pron that is the issue. It's the copying of private made at home pictures that are the concern.
  • Stealing is (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Gonoff ( 88518 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @04:48PM (#19772841)

    when you take something from someone and deprive them of it.

    If someone makes copies of files they find on my PC, they are invading my privacy and that is bad. They are not stealing from me. I still have all my pictures.

    If I have found that someone has invaded my privacy in this way, I will be unhappy but I should not accuse them of theft!

  • by HermMunster ( 972336 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @04:48PM (#19772851)
    Must be stealing articles from digg.com. This is yesterday's news there.

    Anyway, complain about the big guys. The little guy is always tempted, but when the big guy does this shit you shut up.

    Remember when the CEO of Seagate said something about regretting making all these high capacity HDDs only to find that they are being used to store all this pirated content?

    Well, how on earth do you think he knew the content was there? His people are violating customer privacy by examining the contents of the drives. Can you imagine finding racy pictures of your wife or girl friend on the internet from these guys stealing your photos off crashed hard drives?

    You should be seriously considering the big guys not some geek that steals some porn. Talk about a tempting situation. That's like putting a steak on the floor in front of a dog and expecting the dog to have self control and not eat it.
  • by MBGMorden ( 803437 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @04:52PM (#19772911)
    Heck, at two companies I've worked for (both big-name, publicly traded),
    they've caught (and fired) one or more sysadmins reading other people's
    email.


    Huh? Where I'm at we have a specific person (used to be me, but I moved to a different position now) who is specifically SUPPOSED to go through all sorts of emails that get stuck aside for containing any "trigger words".

    As to Encrypt it, or lose it. our system would scan for user-level encryption on any outgoing messages and spits them back to the sender. It's considered a security risk (legal and technical) if the message can't be observed by the system and staff, so they are rejected.
  • by Control Group ( 105494 ) * on Friday July 06, 2007 @04:53PM (#19772917) Homepage
    No. In fact, I haven't seen a single post saying that (note: I'm browsing at +2, so I may have missed some). Moreover, I've seen several posts (like this one) reiterating that it isn't stealing.

    So, frankly, I think your hypocrisy meter needs recalibration. Or are you calling it hypocrisy because Consumerist calls it stealing, while Slashdot (often, perhaps even generally) doesn't? 'Cause that strikes me as a sort of weird definition of hypocrisy. I mean, I wouldn't normally call my boss hypocritical for not giving me a raise when my wife thinks I deserve one.

    For the record: copyright infringement isn't stealing, though it may be unethical. Copying people's porn stashes off their hard drives isn't stealing, though it may be unethical (due primarily to the - naive - presumption of privacy that consumers likely have).
  • by sohare ( 1032056 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @04:58PM (#19773001)

    Are you kidding me? You expect these people, who are the low-paid,
    bottom-of-the-IT-food-chain to have ethics? Why are they any different
    from a parking lot attendant or car wash guy? Because they're techies?
    Don't kid yourself.

    All persons should aspire to live their lives ethically. Rather than have those who do be the exception, it ought to be that those that don't are the exception.
    While it's nice to be an armchair philosopher, human nature does not subscribe to any real set of ethics. Look at things like Christianity, which is a complete and utter failure as a moral guidance system. You should expect people in certain to positions to behave certain ways. Ergo, humans should strive not to live totally ethical lives, but intelligent lives.
    Where is the breach in acquiring someone's porn? Frankly, I think it's disgraceful that a person would leave easy to access pornography on their computer.
    You have to understand something about people. Not everyone things the same. In the U.S., if your child trips on a crack in the road and breaks his face you immediately are outraged at city for having such a detestable street. In, say, Sweden, the individual is culpable for their own actions.
    You shouldn't expect people to behave entirely ethically all the time because that's just contrary to our natures.
  • Off-site storage (Score:2, Insightful)

    by nigelo ( 30096 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @05:01PM (#19773037)
    Is it unethical to protect a customer's data?

    Maybe they were just backing up important files prior to software install?

    It could happen... and apparently did.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 06, 2007 @05:01PM (#19773041)
    I (occasionally) do support / repair / recovery for individuals. Never do I look into media like this, let alone copy it. It's not really that hard - just follow the golden rule. If I wouldn't want someone poking around my files, I do the same for them. Come on, people!

    Cheers
  • by eck011219 ( 851729 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @05:02PM (#19773049)
    It's not entrapment. Entrapment would be forcing them or coercing them to commit the crime, often with another illegal act. Prostitution sting operations, for example, are often very close to (or over the line of) entrapment, as the police plant streetwalkers (an illegal act) in order to catch another illegal act.

    There is nothing like that here -- it's a computer with stuff on it, and their job is not to grab that stuff, it's to fix the computer. End of story.

    How about a folder called "Music"? Can they steal from that because it's labeled as such?

    Living ethically is a lot easier when you have enough ethics to avoid doing bad things for reasons better than "I might get caught."
  • by darkrowan ( 976992 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @05:04PM (#19773083) Homepage
    Small issue (and I don't know if you're trying to be funny or not because of your sarcasm sig): Unless they were to know otherwise, the pictures and iTunes music was not 'stolen'. That is a very bad and overly false assumption to make.

    And, believe it or not, there are those on the 'net that pay for their pr0n, so that isn't a safe place to assume 'stolen' either.
  • by MBCook ( 132727 ) <foobarsoft@foobarsoft.com> on Friday July 06, 2007 @05:05PM (#19773093) Homepage

    I hate relativistic points of view. Some things are just not ethical. There are some things that could be quibbled over (grey areas, mostly), but this isn't something people should be debating. It is very widely consider wrong to steal stuff, kill people, invade people's privacy by looking through all their documents and photos without permission, etc. This is not something that needs to be up for debate.

    As for the idea of "why can't we assume most people are nice", I generally do. But you still should be cautious for two reasons. First of all, despite what I'd like to believe a great many people just aren't ethical (and the constant stream of stuff from politicians, sports, stars, and other "role models" isn't helping).

    Second, "God helps those who help themselves." Just because someone else shouldn't do something doesn't mean you shouldn't do something to try to prevent it. If the cross-walk sign says go you still check for cars right? Other people should stop, but they may not... so you look anyway. Whether you should have to or not, you protect yourself.

    That people do this doesn't surprise me. That low paid people who are trained for 2 hours and given little oversight do this surprises me even less.

  • Re:Well, OK (Score:2, Insightful)

    by krazo ( 220290 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @05:09PM (#19773139)
    Stealing homemade sex videos and that sort of thing from customers' computers is another matter.

    Watch the video from TFA. That's what he does (on a smaller scale.) He downloads personal photos including vacation photos of a girl in a bikini on the beach. He notices that as well and doesn't delete them.

    He didn't LOOK at the porn but it might have been homemade. Who knows? The article makes a good point. Once the computer's broken, you can't necessarily clean it up. If your comp won't start but you happen to have sex videos and nude photos (or equally private but more mundane things) on your desktop. . . well . . .

    It doesn't have to be porn. It could be important business files, personal writing, etc. If it's copyrighted material, that's one thing. If it's personal material, that's completely different. And the guy they caught definitely wasn't bothering to distinguish.
  • by HTH NE1 ( 675604 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @05:12PM (#19773175)

    Prying into the personal documents of your customers is not the least bit in a "grey area".
    But what if it was under the aegis of Thinking Of the Children(TM), i.e. finding and catching pedophiles? I'm sure you could find a lot of people having no problem with that (until they find out their own little Billy has been taking pictures of himself using Daddy's laptop's built-in webcam).
  • by grasshoppa ( 657393 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @05:28PM (#19773385) Homepage
    When the companies we work for dont act ethical, and are kept from acting ethical due to shareholder constraint, why should we care if we're not ethical?

    Ah, the smell of fresh irony in the morning ( afternoon ).

    You act ethically because you hold yourself accountable for your actions. I do a good job because I want to, because at the end of the day I feel good knowing I did the best I could. Not because if I work hard I'll get a "staff appreciation pin". Kudos from employers come and go ( or often are non-existant ).

    I think that's the problem with this country: Too many people expect their managers to help them with their self-esteem. No one other than yourself should have any hand in that.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 06, 2007 @05:36PM (#19773457)

    that's the only problem you see, right?
    Wrong. There is a difference between copying published information and gaining access to and publishing unpublished information. It is not inconsistent to simultaneously disagree with copyright and agree with privacy. Copyrightists want to have their cake and eat it too - have all the advantages of public information and none of the (perceived) disadvantages. Well, screw 'em - if they don't want information replicated, don't publish it.

  • by Lord Ender ( 156273 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @05:36PM (#19773473) Homepage
    Hypothetical question: If you had been working in an area where the "magic" age is 16 or 14, and someone asked you to develop a pic of a 17-year-old, would your stomach still churn?
  • Oblig Car Analogy (Score:5, Insightful)

    by blindd0t ( 855876 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @05:43PM (#19773555)

    My car has some niceties I have added on myself. While I certainly do not take my car to just any mechanic, there are some (rare) exceptions when it cannot go to my usual mechanic (i.e. warranty work I had done in the past). An example of once such feature is a very loud stereo system. I actually take the electronic toll pass, change, and especially the amplifiers, and sub woofers out of the car before taking it in because I know the volume would otherwise be maxed out when I get it back from the shop. I simply do not trust just anyone outside of myself and my close friends to have those items within their reach. Furthermore, I am also careful, as with anybody else, to only hand them the keys they need to operate the vehicle, and do not provide them with my house keys or keys to anything other than the car.

    People need to take the same types of precautions with computers. If possible, back up your files elsewhere (i.e. optical media, portable hard drive) or consider using a network storage device (many home network storage devices are available now with RAID, and are not terribly high in price). Just as you would with a car, take out any money and private/personal belongings and put it elsewhere for while it is in the shop. Also, use different passwords for your logins than you use for your email accounts and the-like, as this is synonymous to only providing them with the key/keys they need.

  • by Hjalmar ( 7270 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @05:53PM (#19773667)
    No.

    Although the words are often used interchangeably, they are not the same thing. A behavior is ethical because it follows a set of rules that have been rationally determined and (usually) written down. A popular reason for defining a behavior as ethically good or ethically bad is that society as a whole benefits when its individuals follow that behavior. Driving safely is a good example of ethical behavior.

    A behavior is moral because God said it was. Or, in the case of the pope's 10 commandments for drivers, because His messager said so. Driving safely is now also a good example of moral behavior, thanks to the recently minted 3rd commandment of driving.

    But either way, copying people's private files for your personal use is wrong.
  • by Fallingcow ( 213461 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @05:56PM (#19773693) Homepage
    That's what I was thinking. If 18.00000001 years doesn't make your stomach churn, but 17.9999995 does, you're probably allowing legality to dictate how you feel about morality, rather than morals.

    There has to be a line somewhere for the law, but in something like this, that extra couple of weeks should have no bearing whatsoever on one's personal feelings. It's irrelevant. Both bother you, or neither does.
  • Re:I've done it. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dballanc ( 100332 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @05:56PM (#19773695)
    I ran a repair shop too, but stealing or even viewing customer files was NOT company policy. We did steps 1-6 and then told the customer we'd keep their backup for at least a week 'just in case'. We also deleted the backups on request of course.

    Unfortunately, thumbnail previews and accidental views sometimes showed me far more than I wanted to see. I think the worst was when a client warned me about the porn videos of his wife, and ASKED me to critique them. That's just creepy. I gave her a B- (hey, it's like an accident, you HAVE to look).

    Ethics mean everything if you want to truly grow a business. You don't gossip about other clients, you look away when they type their password, you try not overhear conversations (and if you do, you mentally stuff those tidbits into a bag, tie a concrete block around them, and throw them to sink in the pool of forgotten memories). It's not just out of consideration for them, but it gains you trust and respect. It's also just the right thing to do.
  • by Gospodin ( 547743 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @06:06PM (#19773781)

    How do we prepare our youth for their adult lives when they see society's role models, government officials, sports superstars, members of the church, etc... committing breaches of ethics on a daily basis?

    Kids' primary role models are their parents. Be a role model, teach them not to look at politicians as role models (is this not extremely obvious!?), and you'll be OK.

  • by MSTCrow5429 ( 642744 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @06:07PM (#19773807)
    So does that mean I could examine every single file on your computer, including your e-mail, passwords, financial data, etc, by saying I'm looking for kiddie-porn? What if I come up with nothing at all? Does probable cause not matter? Does it matter that I'm also not a law enforcement agent, much less one with a search warrant?
  • by Dr Caleb ( 121505 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @06:09PM (#19773833) Homepage Journal
    Sharing customers personal photos isn't prying into private documents? An auto mechannic isn't likely to find photos you took of spousal abuse under your hood. Interesting ethics.
  • by YrWrstNtmr ( 564987 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @06:16PM (#19773931)
    Although the leap to Bush is a bit tedious to make this many times in one day... he does have a point.
    How do we prepare our youth for their adult lives...


    How did your parents prepare you? This started long, long before Bush and Co.

    "I did not have sex with that woman..."
    "I looked on a lot of women with lust.."
    "I am not a criminal..."
  • by Bill, Shooter of Bul ( 629286 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @06:19PM (#19773957) Journal
    How do we prepare our youth for their adult lives

    By teaching them through our own personal behavior, and teaching them morality. We can't expect everyone to be perfect or even good, but that doesn't mean that they or we should stop trying. And when we screw up, we have to admit it and try to improve rather than just justifying it by blaming everyone else, or pointing out examples of other people who have done similar things. In other words we must take responsibility for our own actions, as well as holding other people responsible for theirs.

    just my $.02 , but I have the feeling its worth a lot more than that. Like almost a dollar or so, depending on the exchange rate.
  • by Maxo-Texas ( 864189 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @06:35PM (#19774103)
    Actually... it's more like going in for an oil change and when you get your car, you find out that they opened your trunk, opened your briefcase you had locked in the truck, and copied all your personal documents inside the briefcase. So you return to find your oil changed and your racy picture of your girlfriend up on the wall.
  • by kahrytan ( 913147 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @06:40PM (#19774165)

    Are you kidding me? You expect these people, who are the low-paid,
    bottom-of-the-IT-food-chain to have ethics? Why are they any different
    from a parking lot attendant or car wash guy? Because they're techies?
    Don't kid yourself.

    All persons should aspire to live their lives ethically. Rather than have those who do be the exception, it ought to be that those that don't are the exception.
    I agree with what you said but I would like to make more general and broad term.

    Every member of the Human Race should aspire to better themselves. Because in the end, you loose it all.

    What do you want your legacy to be, a Brutal Dictator or the next great Nobel Prize winner? How much can you contribute to humanity before you die?
  • by HTH NE1 ( 675604 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @06:42PM (#19774189)

    So does that mean I could examine every single file on your computer, including your e-mail, passwords, financial data, etc, by saying I'm looking for kiddie-porn?
    No, it doesn't. Was I not clear on that point? The ends do not justify the means.

    But you should expect it and only be surprised when they don't.

    Does it matter that I'm also not a law enforcement agent, much less one with a search warrant?
    Don't be surprised when evidence from an illegal search by a citizen not operating under color of law enforcement is allowed into evidence in court, and that citizen not have to face any charges of electronic trespass (no reasonable expectation of privacy, no technician-client privilege).

    If you have anything questionable on your machine, even just one illegal installation of pirated software, you don't want anything to do with outside service of your device. Anything they find that is illegal they'll have to report, because they don't know they aren't being tested for failure to not report (the law wants reliable snitches doing PC repair).

    Indeed, you should expect data retention policies to be expanded to PC repair business being required to clone clients' hard drives for possible subpoena later.

    IANAL.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 06, 2007 @06:47PM (#19774247)
    Every time it happens, you should behave as though it is the first time you have ever been so accosted. Ask for identification. Ask the door person his name and his specific relationship to the store. Make sure a long line of angry customers builds behind you. Demand to speak to the manager. Make sure the manager understands that you have never been so insulted in your life, demand and receive a refund on your merchandise and a written apology from the store and the regional manger. Do this in every town you visit.

    Don't complain on slashdot. Become an activist and make institutions change.
  • by Si ( 9816 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @06:56PM (#19774351) Homepage
    If it's wrong, it's not a grey area.
  • by MenTaLguY ( 5483 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @06:57PM (#19774361) Homepage
    Of course, on the other side of the coin, there's also the issue of a pedophile working for GeekSquad acquiring pictures and personal information on your children.
  • by lymond01 ( 314120 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @07:01PM (#19774405)
    Yes, it's called integrity. You stand for what you believe in, no matter what others do. Not to be confused with stubborness, which is standing for what you may or may not believe in simply to spite others.
  • by Evanisincontrol ( 830057 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @07:37PM (#19774809)
    "Insightful"?
  • Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @07:55PM (#19775001)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by Thing 1 ( 178996 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @08:20PM (#19775227) Journal

    Please don't call it kiddie-porn. It's child abuse.

    This may be unpopular, but how can numbers possibly be a significant enough threat to land one in prison? (A digital image file is a very large number.)

    Yes, by all means, find the people who perpetrated the original crime of your term child abuse (or more emotionally, sexual assault of a defenseless child), and bring them to justice.

    However, once a society makes owning a number a crime, it makes it very easy to "frame" people who hold unpopular-but-not-illegal beliefs: just push some child pornography into their computer, or easier, "find" some photos in their car.

    This is very scary stuff. I am ashamed that we have made it illegal to have a number (or a photo), not out of any desire to obtain and retain said numbers or photos, but simply because the threat of abuse of this type of law is obvious and has already happened (witness RIAA witch hunts).

    And the reason it's scary is because I truly care about the injured victims and want restitution. Going after third parties does not help, and creates a police state in which unpopular beliefs like mine can be silenced through selective evidence planting.

    Similarly, felons should retain the right to vote, especially since having the wrong number can make you a felon.

  • by VGR ( 467274 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @08:33PM (#19775313)

    If it was Child porn then we beat you up while the cops are on the way (really happened, cops didn't arrest our guy, but told him to hope the CP guy didn't realize he could press charges).

    Wow, awesome. Vigilante justice. You must be so proud.

    Believe it or not, "truth and justice for all" does not mean "justice for all, except the people we're pretty sure don't deserve it." The whole point of the American system is that a fair legal system is far more qualified to punish people than you and your thug buddies. You are no better than a villager with a pitchfork going after Frankenstein's monster.

    I'm not saying you should have done nothing at all. Holding or stalling him until the police arrived would have been appropriate. Or at least getting his license plate.

    We had one issue where the girl looked a little young, so we gave the guy a chance to have her, with ID come in and she could pick up the photos. She showed up, and the ID was good (honestly didn't look fake), thing is, her hair was noticeably shorter in the pics and she had turned 18 only a week? before. we let her have the photos, for lack of proof that she was underage, but it made my stomach churn.

    Made your stomach churn? What the hell?

    If it was a picture of a guy with a seven-year-old, I would agree. But a girl who might have been a week less than eighteen?

    There is nothing sick or wrong about having sex with a 17-year-old girl; it just happens to be illegal in a lot of places. If you happen to be gay, that's fine. If it made your stomach churn for any other reason, there is something wrong with you.

  • by megaditto ( 982598 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @08:54PM (#19775485)
    What he found after breaking in does not justify him breaking in! I agree that he should have reported those abuse images to the authorities, but in general, ex post facto justifications are almost never good:

    "so I did kill the guy, but he turned out to be a child molester" -- Should you be going around killing people in the hopes you eventually catch one?

    "so I raped that girl, but she liked me in the end" -- should you be going around... you get the point I think.
  • Peek Squad? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Jeremiah Cornelius ( 137 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @08:54PM (#19775487) Homepage Journal
    Or mebbee Freak Squad?

    Yo... The photo processor at Thrifty and Walgreens been lookin' at your stray pookie shots for some tyme now, my brother.
  • by eat here_get gas ( 907110 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @09:15PM (#19775613) Homepage
    Bullfuckingshit! Whatever I put on my computer is MY PERSONAL STUFF, whether I got it publicly or not. The guy looking under your hood CAN because there is the "reasonable expectation" that HE HAS TO!

    OTOH, while I "allow" someone to PERUSE my files for diagnostic purposes, COPYING MY FILES has absolutely NO "REASONABLE EXPECTATION" AT ALL!

    wake the fuck up, man...
  • by blacklint ( 985235 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @09:16PM (#19775623)
    Saying an image file on a computer is just one big number is like saying humans are just a bunch of carbon atoms. It's a failed analogy. So the next time someone steals your car, you can just shrug it off and say, "oh, those silly carbon atoms!" (Sorry I can't properly attribute that, but I forgot the original source).
  • by eli pabst ( 948845 ) on Friday July 06, 2007 @10:20PM (#19776089)

    They aren't prying into documents, they are copying media files. Its quite a big difference. It's not more of an invasion of privacy than the guy at the auto shop looking under the hood to see what you are running.
    That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard in a while. They were paid to install iTunes. How does digging through various personal folders for image files and then copying pictures of bikini-clad women to a USB drive have anything fucking remotely related to do with "installing itunes"? Maybe you have some version of the iTunes installer that I'm missing out on.
  • by Atroxodisse ( 307053 ) on Saturday July 07, 2007 @01:13AM (#19777165) Homepage
    First, I'd like to say you people are demented. Just because your victim is an idiot doesn't mean it's ok. Who calls GeekSquad in the first place? It isn't anyone who even knows what encryption is. They don't have a clue what you're doing. They know how to do about 10 different things on the computer that they learned by muddling through it and they don't stray outside that. If you think it matters who the files belong to then you're just plain ethically challenged. It's called privacy. Look up the word. Look up your right to it in the constitution. The government can't break your privacy and some underpaid shit from GeekSquad sure as hell can't break it either.

    I'm guessing that a lot of the GeekSquad employees feel justified because of what some of their customers ask them to do. I worked as an underpaid IT shit and I got ethically questionable requests from customers all the time. From wanting me to use a pirated OS to wanting me to backup their pirated software. I'm sure you all don't find a problem with that either. Work one day as a programmer and you'll change your tune.
  • by Thing 1 ( 178996 ) on Saturday July 07, 2007 @01:58AM (#19777419) Journal

    Furthermore, if you're NOT going to treat finding child porn on someone as serious, then you've automatically given true offenders a plausible way out.

    "If you're NOT going to treat finding a hammer on someone as serious, then you've automatically given skull crushers a plausible way out."

    See how ridiculous it sounds when it isn't "about the children?"

    The people who we should spending our tax law enforcement dollars on are the people who are actually and actively creating victims. Someone looking at a picture (or in possession of a hammer) is not doing anything to create a victim. It's when the child abuse happens, or the hammer is swung at a skull, that the crime takes place.

    But I'm not defining the law, simply finding holes in its application. I apologize if I have offended you.

  • by vertinox ( 846076 ) on Saturday July 07, 2007 @08:15AM (#19778875)
    They were paid to install iTunes.

    Actually, I think that is the biggest crime right there.
  • by eli pabst ( 948845 ) on Saturday July 07, 2007 @11:53AM (#19780325)

    The smart thing to do, given that there aren't even basic ethics or civics classes being taught anymore in public school, is to assume that is is eminently possible that your files might be looked through.
    IMO, I think that whether this was the "smart" thing to do is the irrelevant part. Sure it's stupid to walk down the street with a wad of $20 bills in my hand, but that doesn't make it ok for someone to steal it. The job they were paid to do did in no way require them to be looking through those files and as such the owners had a reasonable expectation of privacy.

    This is through no real fault of the kids in question, other than that they are the ones who transgressed, but rather the society, mainly the parents, that brought them up.
    While I strongly agree that good parenting is a huge component, everyone knows that taking other peoples stuff is wrong and you have to take personal responsibility for your actions at some point.

"Money is the root of all money." -- the moving finger

Working...