Flie Privacy

[overalls]

Recently a situation has arose in our office and just wondered what the legal implications would be.

we have public computer in the office free for anyone to use for anything they wish.

As normal someone had been updating a cv but rather than remove the floppy from the a drive had left it behind.

The problem that has occoured is that ?????CV.doc has appeared in the documents part of the start panel allowing the cv to be opened from the desktop. whilst looking at the cv he was caught looking at it by the owner.

Apart from being a bit silly to do, are there any legal implications that may arise from this as the person who owns the cv was rather angry. The disc was not protected any way and it was not in a seperate user area.

[The Nr Fairy]

I'll leave the legal implications to someone else, but my gut feel is that in this circumstance there are very few, unless the information was acted upon.

In this particular circumstance, I would suggest it's down to the owner of the information to protect it - if it was on a floppy, it's not difficult to take it out ! Also, floppies are still a means by which viruses can infect PCs - I've not needed to use one for about 3 years to keep personal data on.

Generally, any company dealing with electronic data should have a security policy which is enforced - file permissions, authorisations and the like. To do otherwise is inviting theft of proprietary information, potential loss / destruction, and unauthorised access - who wouldn't want to know what the boss earns !

[Blacksheep]

Peanuts! I can assure you he earns peanuts. Don't bother looking.

**************************
Through difficulties to the cinema

[FJJP]

There is a feature in both Word 98 and 2000 that will secure your files by protecting them with a password. I use it all the time in the office.

Word98:

Save - options

At the bottom of the window you insert passwords to open and/or modify the file.

Word2000:

Save - tools - options

The same window is available.

Don't forget your password, though - otherwise you won't be able to open it again!

On the legal side, reading a file on a public computer I doubt would lead to any legal action. However, the business should have an IT security policy, and those I have seen warn of disciplinary action following the misuse of the system or contents; altering someones personal documents to cause embarrassment is likely to be dealt with under these rules. Remember the solicitors office case a few years ago when a highly intimate e-mail was intercepted and spread round the world in a few days? The nasty individual who did that got the sack (and rightly so).

[bughunta]

I assume he/you know how to clear the document panel in the Start Menu, if that's also what's bothering him?

Start->Settings->Task bar and Start Menu->Advanced->Clear

Least that's the way it is in W2K Pro. Be similar if not the same for the others OS's...

bug

[FJJP]

ASFCAP, I don't doubt that there is software out there to crack our passwords. However, a good company IT policy and organisation will prevent the loading of unauthorised software. In the situation that Overalls finds himself, I would suspect that the individuals involved would be the casual browser and not the dedicated hacker.

[overalls]

thanks for the responses.

Things have now calmed down a bit but still interesting to see what the legalities of personal stuff on a company, open computer really are and how far it could be taken.

[Naples Air Center, Inc.]

overalls,

You asked about the legal implications of information left on the open company computer. The answer is, the person that left the information on the computer does not own it and stopped owning that information the second he put it in the work computer. The actual owner is the owner of the company itself, not the author.

Anything typed or worked on at a business becomes instant property of the owner of the company. The simple rule is, if it is private or personal, leave it at home.

Take Care,

Richard

P.S. Another word of warning, there is no such thing as invasion of privacy or spying when it comes to computers in the workplace. The owner of the company can legally have every keystroke logged in the entire company should he/she want it. (Same goes for every website surfed too!)

[WeatherJinx]

Well, we're all God's creatures...I guess flies like their privacy just like the rest of us..

[25F]

Richard, it depends (as ever) where you are.

The UK is subject to a lot of contradictory national and European legislation. As a result there are now guidelines, which state that employers can "monitor staff emails, provided that employees have been warned that monitoring is taking place, and that the reasons for monitoring have been explained".

More info here: http://www.computing.co.uk/News/1141522 As a general guide I think you'll find European legislation much more in favour of the employee than the employer, compared to the situation in the US.

As for leaving a floppy with your CV on it in a PC it's a bit like leaving a printed copy lying around the break room. It's bad manners to look at it but I don't think it's an offense!

[Naples Air Center, Inc.]

25F,

Thank you for the article. It is interesting to see the differences. The thought behind it in the U.S. is:
[list=1][*]Employer pays the Employee to be at work.[*]Employer provides the workspace.[*]Employer provides the computer hardware and software.[/list=1]

Therefore anything generated belongs to the company/employer.

Thanks again,

Richard

P.S. Still the best advice is, if you do not want others to see it, do not bring it to work.

[RomeoTangoFoxtrotMike]

1. Employer pays the Employee to be at work.
2. Employer provides the workspace.
3. Employer provides the computer hardware and software.

Therefore anything generated belongs to the company/employer.

Richard,

That was pretty much the way it was in the UK up until a few years ago. Then, one day, a lady in a senoir position sued her employers for unfair dismissal. Part of the employers case relied on tapes of phone conversations, which, since they were made on the organisation's phone system was, up to that point, considered permissable. The lady in question claimed invasion of privacy under the European Human Rights Act and took the case all the way to Stasbourg (home of the European Court) and won.

What was interesting about the case was not that that she won on the grounds of invasion of privacy, but on the grounds that the interception of her communications was "unlawful", i.e. that there was no law in the UK that explicitly permitted such an interception (the implication being that if such a law had existed, she might have lost the case.)

Anyway, the lack of any legal basis for interceptions was what blasted the Govt. into action: a swathe of mutually contradictory, ill-conceived and badly drafted legislation has followed (that's not to say that such protection of privacy legislations shouldn't exist, of course, please don't think I mean that -- just that it should be properly thought through and carefully implemented. Not the knee-jerk reaction that we get to everything these days, like anti-terrorism legislation bringing about the demise of rides in the jumpseat )

What made the case all the more noteable was that the lady in question was the Assistant Chief Counstable of the Greater Manchester Police, i.e. second in command of a major UK police force

[ Edited to correct her rank ]