Monday, April 8, 2013

Computer Online Computer:Kindle Fire HD 7", Dolby Audio, Dual-Band Wi-Fi, 16 GB - Includes Special Offers

Computer See Kindle Fire HD 7", Dolby Audio, Dual-Band Wi-Fi, 16 GB - Includes Special Offers Details

List Price : $199.00 Price : $199.00
as of 2013-04-09 12:19 AM

Kindle Fire HD 7

Product Description

World's most advanced 7" tablet with stunning HD display, exclusive Dolby audio, and the fastest Wi-Fi found on a tablet. When it comes to HD displays, great resolution is just the start. Kindle Fire HD delivers rich color and deep contrast from every angle, with an advanced polarizing filter and custom anti-glare technology. Our exclusive Dolby Digital Plus audio includes technology to adjust volume, create virtual surround sound, and deliver easier-to-understand dialogue in movies and TV shows.

  • Stunning 1280x800 HD display with rich color and deep contrast from any viewing angle
  • Exclusive Dolby audio and dual driver stereo speakers for crisp, booming sound without distortion
  • Ultra-fast Wi-Fi- dual-antenna, dual-band Wi-Fi for 35% faster downloads and streaming
  • Over 22 million movies, TV shows, songs, magazines, books, audiobooks, and popular apps and games

More About Kindle Fire HD 7", Dolby Audio, Dual-Band Wi-Fi, 16 GB - Includes Special Offers

Most employees just accept the fact that their employer can access any content that is on a company computer, which include employees personal emails and other personal information. But, is that the law? A growing wide range of courts seem to be recognizing that employees have some expectation of privacy with respect with their personal content on organization computers. Some recent decisions have held that employers do not own and cannot access their employees personal emails not even if those emails were sent on a business computer.

Marina Stengart v. Loving Care Agency, Inc. is very a workplace privacy case that was decided on June 26, 2009. Marina Stengart worked as an Executive Director of Nursing at Loving Care Agency, Inc. Loving Care provided Stengart with a enterprise computer and an email address to accomplish her work duties. Loving Care had an electronic communications policy And this stated that emails, Internet use and computer files are considered the companys property and are not to be considered private or personal to any individual employee. The policy too stated that the business had the proper to review, audit, intercept, access, and disclose all matters around the companys media systems and services at any time, with other or without having notice.

Stengart employed her organization computer to email her attorneys about filing a discrimination lawsuit against Loving Care. But, Stengart did not use her organization email address. She emailed her attorneys along with other her personal, password protected Yahoo email account whilst employing her enterprise computer. Stengart resigned from one her employment and sued Loving Care for discrimination. Loving Care then searched Stengarts business computer and, pursuant to its electronic communications policy, read the emails Stengart exchanged with her attorneys. Stengart angered by Loving Cares reading of her personal emails, asked the Court to decide if Loving Care had the correct under its electronic communications policy to read emails she sent to her attorneys through her personal email account on her business computer.

The Stengart Court rejected the notion that an employees personal emails grow to be organization property simply due in to the fact the enterprise owns the computer, claiming that a business computer in this setting is little more compared to a file cabinet: "Property rights seem to be no less offended when an employer examines documents stored on a computer as when an employer rifles by way of a folder containing an employees private papers or reaches in and examines the contents of an employees pockets; indeed, even if a legitimate organization purpose could support such a search, we can picture no valid precept of property law that would convert the employers interest in determining what is in those areas with a right to own the contents of the employees folder of private papers or the contents of his pocket." The Court ruled against Loving Care, concluding that an employer cannot transform all private communications into organization property -- merely due into the fact the company owned the computer utilised to create the private communications or utilized to access such private Info during work hours.

Marina Stengart asked the Court if her employer had the correct to view her personal emails. Bonnie Van Alstyne took the workplace privacy notion a step further when she sued her former employer for accessing her personal emails. Bonnie Van Alstyne worked as a Vice President at Electronic Scriptorium Limited, a little data conversion organization owned and operated by Edward Leonard. Van Alstyne had a organization email account, but she occasionally used her personal AOL email account to conduct business. Van Alstynes employment was terminated and she filed a sexual harassment lawsuit against the company. throughout the discovery process, Van Alstyne learned that Edward Leonard accessed her personal email account both during and after her employment. Leonard produced 258 emails he had printed from one Van Alstynes personal email account.

Van Alstyne filed a separate lawsuit against Leonard, Bonnie Van Alstyne v. Electronic Scriptorium Limited, et al. Her lawsuit alleged that Leonard violated the Stored Communications Act when he accessed her personal email account and viewed her emails. The Stored Communications Act creates criminal and civil liability for any individual who intentionally accesses without having authorization a facility through Which an electronic communication service is provided or intentionally exceeds an authorization to access that facility and obtains, alters, or prevents authorized usage of a wire or electronic communication even though It is in electronic storage in such system. In other words, the Stored Communication Act prohibits an individual from, among other things, intentionally accessing other peoples stored emails, voicemails, text messages, etc. without permission. A jury found that Leonard violated the Stored Communications Act and awarded Van Alstyne $250,000 in compensatory and punitive damages and a lot more than it is $136,000 in attorneys fees and costs.

The law is changing. Courts seem to be recognizing that employees require a right to privacy in their personal emails even though those emails appear to be sent on business computers and even when business policy says otherwise. But, both Marina Stengarts and Bonnie Van Alstynes employers read their personal emails And this gave their employers valuable defensive Info and severely prejudiced Stengart and Van Alstyne in their pending lawsuits. A lawsuit cannot unring that bell. And, Stengart and Van Alstyne were forced into lengthy, costly legal battles to enforce their privacy rights. It is encouraging that courts are recognizing employee privacy rights and giving employees remedies when those rights appear to be violated. However, the greatest course of action is to keep your own personal email and your organization computer separate thereby eliminating any possibility that your employer will view your own emails.

Kindle Fire HD 7", Dolby Audio, Dual-Band Wi-Fi, 16 GB - Includes Special Offers Reviews

Kindle Fire HD 7", Dolby Audio, Dual-Band Wi-Fi, 16 GB - Includes Special Offers:Computer

Kindle Fire HD 7