Boston College forced to give back student's computer

Since when did knowing more than the campus cops about computers make you a criminal?

Story from EFF

As we reported in Since when was using command prompt illegal?, police at Boston Campus College seized a student’s computer because he was suspected of using the “command prompt”. As Jay Leno would say “OOOOOOHHHH! That’s a big one.”

A judge from the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled the student should get his laptop back along with any other property that was taken. Boston State College infringed the student’s right to protection from unreasonable search and seizure. Hooray for freedom in a democracy but look at the effort. EFF had to hire a lawyer in Massachusetts to defend the student.

From our experience, campus policy see themselves above the law. Private cops are not trained and regulated like public police forces. They answer to university management and the Board of Regents.

One would think places of higher learning would be bastions of liberal democracy but this is sadly not the case in many instances. Universities are bastions of right-wing conservatism and often fight against constitutional safeguards.

A prime example in Canada on Prince Edward Island is the University of Prince Edward Island which removed disabled parking with impunity. The President of the University, Wade MacLaughlan, and the Board of Governors show contempt for the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms which promise that the disabled will not be discriminated against. UPEI flaunts building codes that require disabled parking to be no more than 160 feet or 50 meters from the building. Some parking lots at UPEI are more than 650 feet from the entrances.

What disabled student has the money to hire lawyers and sue UPEI? The sad story is that constitutional rights are trampled by universities on a regular basis. At least on Boston, one student was protected. Unfortunately and in all probability, Boston State College will seek some other means to punish this student.

Student’s Computers Were Seized Under Baseless Theory of Computer Hacking

Boston College forced to give back student's computer

Boston – A justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has ordered police to return a laptop and other property seized from a Boston College computer science student’s dorm room after finding there was no probable cause to search the room in the first place. The police were investigating whether the student sent hoax emails about another student.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and Boston law firm Fish and Richardson are representing the computer science student, who was forced to complete much of the final month of the semester without his computer and phone. Boston College also shut off the student’s network access in the wake of the now-rejected search.

“The judge correctly found that there was no legitimate reason to search and seize this student’s property,” said EFF Civil Liberties Director Jennifer Granick. “Our client was targeted because law enforcement was improperly suspicious of our client’s computer skills and misunderstood computer crime laws. We’re grateful that the court was able to see through the commonwealth’s smokescreen and rectify this mistake.”

In her order Thursday, Justice Margot Botsford rejected the commonwealth’s theory that sending a hoax email might be unlawful under a Massachusetts computer crime statute barring the “unauthorized access” to a computer, concluding that there could be no violation of what was only a “hypothetical internet use policy.” Thursday’s decision now stands as the highest state court opinion to reject the dangerous theory that terms of service violations constitute computer “hacking” crimes. Justice Botsford further found that details offered by police as corroboration of other alleged offenses were insufficient and did not establish probable cause for the search.

“No one should be subjected to a search like this based on such flimsy theories and evidence,” said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Matt Zimmerman. “The Fourth Amendment flatly bars such fishing expeditions. Computer expertise is not a crime, and it was inappropriate for the commonwealth to employ such transparent scare tactics in an attempt to hide the fact that they had no case.”

EFF had appealed the case to the Massachusetts Supreme Court with Fish & Richardson attorneys Adam Kessel, Lawrence Kolodney, and Tom Brown.