Spyware + Cellphones: As Creepy as it Sounds

Alrighty everyone,


http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57620398-83/how-to-spy-on-your-lover-the-smartphone-way/


Today I brought up an article about spying on your significant other through spyware that you would manually install (and would then become undetectable to the regular user) on their phone. True, you would have to jailbreak an iPhone to accomplish this, but the technology would work automatically with any Android phone.

I wanted to share the article because it was written in a fairly cheeky manner, and maybe we'd all benefit from a bit of 'fun' reading, given how late we are into the semester and how little fun we will soon be having. Also, if you already wanted to spy on your girlfriend/boyfriend and just didn't know how yet... You're welcome!

Okay but seriously, I do have a legitimate question that spawned from reading this article. The creators of the app include an explicit notification prior to its usage that notifies the installer that it should "not be used for illegal purposes". At first, I wondered if this would exclude them from liability if some sort of personal altercation arose from this software. Michael mentioned that the argument that guns are as instrumental in shooting someone as the other person holding it, which is analogous to the technology that is being provided and installed with consent in this instance. However, manufacturers of guns are not held liable for the misuse of their product as long as the product isn't defective/causes injury purely by itself (or so I presume). As long as the manufacturer/creator has met the requirement of some sufficient warning, should the product itself really be held accountable? Would it ever be found to be an unlawful, or illegal, kind of software?

While these questions haven't been resolved, I also want to direct attention to the fact that the application has been made purposely visibly-undetectable. If the idea of the app creators was not to install the software in any way that could be construed as violating another's privacy without consent, why shouldn't the application's icon be made visible? If it was more geared toward parental monitoring of their child's devices, there would be no reason to include this feature, since the presence of an icon, or even opening it, wouldn't necessarily entail that the user of the phone can turn off the application.

For that reason, I think I can infer that the general purpose this application could be used for would be less than ethical (aside from highly intrusive). Still no idea if this would affect the liability or non-liability for the fictitious 'egregious tort' we referred to in class.

Long story short: don't install spyware on people's phones against their will, and you'll most likely be fine.