Watching people surreptitiously in the privacy of their homes, definitely in the wrong.
Tracking the computers' whereabouts- I don't see why this couldn't have just been made known, e.g. "We'll be tracking the location of the machine so that when you fail to pay, we can recover our property."
Disabling the computer when renters get behind- where is the problem here? If you don't make your mortgage or rent payments, you don't get to stay for free. There are automobile finance companies for a similar demographic that will disable the car when payment isn't made. It's not like the car stops working when you're a day late. The computer warns the driver long before disabling the car. Kinda makes sense to give your 'customer' a warning and maintain her ability to drive to you to make payments.
And what's this "force a fake popup"? What's a fake popup versus a real one? Perhaps the store's systems should know who has rented which machines. But I suspect this is more about tracking the computer's location for recovery when payments are behind.
So here's my take: invasion of privacy is a big problem and should be prosecuted. Disabling service and recovering property that hasn't been paid for just makes sense. Certainly this particular company could have been more scrupulous about locating their property when payments were not made.
Ignoring all the screen capture and webcam nonsense and focuses strictly on the location tracking: should it be expected for a company that will by its definition attract deadbeats and scammers be required to detail its security measures?
Tracking the computers' whereabouts- I don't see why this couldn't have just been made known, e.g. "We'll be tracking the location of the machine so that when you fail to pay, we can recover our property."
Disabling the computer when renters get behind- where is the problem here? If you don't make your mortgage or rent payments, you don't get to stay for free. There are automobile finance companies for a similar demographic that will disable the car when payment isn't made. It's not like the car stops working when you're a day late. The computer warns the driver long before disabling the car. Kinda makes sense to give your 'customer' a warning and maintain her ability to drive to you to make payments.
And what's this "force a fake popup"? What's a fake popup versus a real one? Perhaps the store's systems should know who has rented which machines. But I suspect this is more about tracking the computer's location for recovery when payments are behind.
So here's my take: invasion of privacy is a big problem and should be prosecuted. Disabling service and recovering property that hasn't been paid for just makes sense. Certainly this particular company could have been more scrupulous about locating their property when payments were not made.