A U.S. District Judge last week ruled against Absolute Software, a company that provides services to track and recover stolen computers, in a case where the company captured sexually explicit images of a woman who was using a laptop reported as stolen.

Absolute Software had sought a summary judgment that its recovery agents acted properly. 

The woman, Susan Clements-Jeffrey, a 52-year-old substitute teacher in Ohio, had bought the laptop for $60 from a student. This student in turn bought it from another student--presumably the person who stole the laptop, which belonged to the Clark Country School District of Ohio.

As reported by PCWorld, Clements-Jeffrey and her boyfriend then sued Absolute Software, the city of Springfield, Ohio and two police officers involved.

At the heart of the matter is whether someone who acquires stolen goods loses their right to privacy. The defense maintains that Clements-Jeffrey should have known that the laptop was stolen property given its low price. The serial number was also scraped off the bottom of the machine.

While not condemning the use of an IP address to track down the location of a stolen machine, the judge in his decision (.pdf) wrote: "It is something entirely different to violate federal wiretapping laws by intercepting the electronic communications of the person using the stolen laptop."

What's your take on this? Do you think Absolute Software did wrong by Clements-Jeffrey?

For more:
- check out this article at Wired
- check out this article at PCWorld

Related Articles:
Mistaken porn raid highlights the risks of unsecured Wi-Fi routers
Peeping computer repairman is cautionary tale for outsourcing maintenance
Hackers can unlock electronic prison doors
Wi-Fi hacker gets 18 years, highlights danger of unsecured networks
Defendant cites Fifth Amendment in refusing to give laptop password to prosecutors