{"id":2725,"date":"2010-05-08T17:40:27","date_gmt":"2010-05-08T21:40:27","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/rbachnet.wwwmi3-ss40.a2hosted.com\/?p=2725"},"modified":"2022-12-30T12:49:45","modified_gmt":"2022-12-30T17:49:45","slug":"scotus-look-at-texting-sexting-messages","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/rbach.net\/index.php\/scotus-look-at-texting-sexting-messages\/","title":{"rendered":"SCOTUS Look At Texting and Sexting"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"SCOTUS<\/a>The U.S. Supreme Court<\/a> recently heard oral arguments in the sexting case City of Ontario, Ontario Police Department, and Lloyd Scharf v. Jeff Quon, et al<\/a>. \u00a0According to the Workplace Privacy Data Management & Security Report<\/a><\/em> by the legal firm of Jackson|Lewis<\/a>, this case highlights the effects new technologies continue to have on workplace privacy issues.<\/p>\n

Sexting messages<\/h3>\n

One issue the Court will consider is whether a California police department violated the privacy of one of its officers when it read the personal “sexting” messages on his department issued pager. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Court <\/a>sided with the police officer and ruled that users of text messaging services \u201chave a reasonable expectation of privacy\u201d regarding messages stored on the service provider\u2019s network.<\/p>\n

\"\"Police Sgt. Jeff Quon, his wife, his girlfriend, and another police sergeant filed the original suit. The suit started after one of Quon\u2019s superiors audited his messages and found that many of them were sexually explicit “sexting” and personal. Among the defendants were the City of Ontario, the Ontario Police Department, and Arch Wireless Operating. Co. Inc. Plaintiffs sought damages for alleged violation of their privacy rights.<\/p>\n

Arch Wireless contracted with the employer, the City of Ontario, California, to provide text-messaging services using pagers. The City distributed the pagers to various employees. The employees signed an “Employee Acknowledgment” of the City\u2019s general “Computer Usage, Internet, and E-mail Policy.”<\/p>\n

The policy stated that the City reserved the right to “monitor and log all network activity including e-mail and Internet use, with or without notice.” The policy also stated that “[u]sers should have no expectation of privacy or confidentiality when using these resources.” Quon also attended a meeting during which a police Lieutenant stated that pager messages “were considered e-mail and that those messages would fall under the City’s policy as public information and eligible for auditing.”<\/p>\n

A certain number of characters each month were allocated to each pager per month, Quon exceeded his allotment on several occasions. The Lieutenant attempted to determine whether the overages were business-related and obtained transcripts of text messages for the employees with overages. After auditing the transcripts provided by Arch Wireless the matter was referred to the City’s Internal Affairs agency. Where it was determined that Quon exceeded his monthly character allotment and many of his messages were personal and not business-related.<\/p>\n

Court rulings<\/h3>\n

\"\"The case went to trial and the jury ruled in favor of the employer. The plaintiffs appealed the ruling. The Court of Appeals ruled that the plaintiff had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the text messages. The Court held that he had a reasonable expectation of privacy because the City:<\/p>\n