Aaron’s rental services is facing a federal lawsuit alleging that the firm installed spyware on a consumer’s rented PC to track renters’ keystrokes and usage activity.

A Wyoming couple has filed a suit against furniture and electronics rental company Aaron’s claiming that they invaded the couple’s privacy by loading their rented PC with spyware that could track keystrokes, take screenshots and even record webcam images.

In a world where privacy means everything, finding out when it is too late that your personal information has been compromised is a very uneasy feeling. Aaron’s, a major furniture and electronics rental chain based out of Atlanta, GA, has apparently been loading their computers rented by consumers with spy software that has the ability to track a user’s activity to a certain degree. Computer privacy experts say that Aaron’s has a right to do this but consumers are all up in arms about their recent discovery especially one Wyoming coupe, Brian Byrd and Crystal Byrd, who has filed a privacy suit against Aaron’s.

The Byrd’s rented a PC from Aaron’s and was later mistakenly accused of not paying their bill. At that time, the manager attempted to repossess the computer. When the manager was presented with a signed receipt of payment from Brian Byrd, the manager then showed Byrd a picture of Byrd using the computer taken by the computer’s webcam. After Byrd demanded to know where the image came from, the manager explained ‘he was not supposed to disclose that Aaron’s had the photograph,’ the lawsuit said. It was obvious that the system had some type of spyware installed which the Byrds were not aware of prompting the current suit against Aaron’s.

After this surprising discovery, the Byrd’s decided to contact the police who confirmed that the image shown by an Aaron’s manager was indeed taken with Designerware’s spyware software, which was apparently installed on all of Aaron’s rented PCs.

Designerware, a Pennsylvania-based software company, is also being sued in the District Court on the basis of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

The attorneys handling the case have said it will be difficult to tell if either of the laws were broken especially if it is software that uses a legal ‘kill switch’, which would ultimately protect companies from fraud and crimes. You can think of a kill switch giving someone a way of deactivating the spyware software temporarily.

Such a case like this brings about several questions. Should other organizations have the ability, even if not actively used, to monitor or spy on consumers without notifying them of doing so? Should services such as Google or software apps on your smartphone be able to monitor certain things such as your current location? If these services or so-called ’spyware’ helps make the functionality of a program ‘better’, shouldn’t the consumer be notified of it before they use or purchase the item?

There has been a case where Philadelphia school district had to pay up $610,000 to settle two lawsuits over secret photos taken on school-issued laptops. These laptops were equipped with software that assists when recovering them if missing/stolen but were used to capture webcam photos and screen shots.

Has our sensitivity to privacy gotten out of hand or are we rightfully justified in demanding that companies or organizations spill the beans before someone is ‘exposed’?