You have to keep in mind he was on public Property (the Street) and the Router probobly asked him if he wanted to join and proceded to let him in.
Its like if you were standing at your door saying anyone want to use my bathroom, but theyd have to ask you first and you would (out of the goodness of your heart) always say yes. If he hacked in it's another story though. Its like knocing down your door to get in and you say No but he does it any way.
The router does not ask. The wireless card software asks. If people want to leave their routers open for people to access that is their choice. Those that do not, should not have to secure the router. If I choose to leave my car or house door unlocked that does not mean that you can enter and hangout.
Everyone is trying to make analogies, and the truth is that none of them accurately apply in this situation. Why? Because Wi-Fi is a relatively new and unique technology, and the borrowing and/or stealing of these radio signals hasn't been clearly interpreted or defined to a degree that we can all agree on. We all know that it's wrong to steal a physical object from someone's person, home, car, etc., but there seems to be some gray area when it comes to unprotected Wi-Fi networks.
Personally, I have no qualms about popping onto an unprotected Wi-Fi network to check email or browse the web for a couple of minutes. But that's me; I'm evil.
I was surprised throughout Europe to see that the cafes didn't offer any kind of wi-fi service, although most of the credit card transactions I did see were through a wi-fi system.
Here in the states, thankfully, there are coffee houses all over inviting you to use free wi-fi.
I admit, as I traveled in the UK, France, and Spain a couple of weeks ago, I used accessible wi-fi networks to check e-mail and communicate with a list of parents (I was a teacher on a school trip with students), as well as to update Avantgo. I was unable to find a single unsecured network in Spain, so I paid there...rates were commonly 1 Euro for 15 to 30 minutes, up to 5 Euros for an hour. I know everything is clearly more expensive in Europe, but I can't imagine high-speed access is anywhere near that costly. Those places and folks are making their money back very, very quickly.
Just to be nitpicky, wi-fi signals are in the microwave range, not the radio range. That's why when you run your microwave it might interfere with your signal.
Richard Dinon saw the laptop's muted glow through the rear window of the SUV parked outside his home. He walked closer and noticed a man inside.
Then the man noticed Dinon and snapped his computer shut.
Maybe it's census work, the 28-year-old veterinarian told his girlfriend. An hour later, Dinon left to drive her home. The Chevy Blazer was still there, the man furtively hunched over his computer.
Dinon returned at 11 p.m. and the men repeated their strange dance.
Don't let those sensationalist stories get to you. Use some critical thought please.
Also, there is another difference. If someone came into your house locked or unlocked you would be able to shoot them in self defense. Not that many questions would be asked. Now, what do you suppose would have happened if this homeowner had shot this person for using his internet connection? Somehow, I think even the law sees a difference here.
Let's get one thing straight. I don't have any other WiFi devices other than my laptop, which never leaves the desk. I enable WEP, so I am secure. I didn't agree with the third degree felony charges either, but you can't liken staring through a window from the street to watch TV to using a service that enables you use someone else's pay service. Atually if you were standing out in the street looking through my window for too long, I am sure a neighbor or myself would come outside to talk (non threatening).
Regardless, this issue will never be black & white nor cut & dry when there are such differences of opinion. FMO brings up good points about the newness of the technology and the new Tech laws that follow. Things will need to be worked out at the judicial level.
Like the Digital Underground once said, "Do Watcha Like."
Everyone is trying to make analogies, and the truth is that none of them accurately apply in this situation.
I agree wholeheartedly. The best analogy I've come up with so far is water flowing through a stream across your property. I'm free to drink as much as I want as long as I don't come on your property to get it--even if you built the streambed that caries it across.
I see a very strong parallel between this issue and the legal wars in the early 80's that revolved around a persons legal right to record telivision programs. The courts (U.S.) found a very distinct difference between broadcast TV and cable TV.
One could be prohibited from legally recording a movie from HBO. One could not be prohibited from recording a movie broadcast by a local TV station. The difference centered around both the free and unlimited transmission of broadcast signals vs. the controlled delivery system of cable, as well as the cable users contractual agreement with the cable company that doesn't exist between broadcast companies and their viewers.
Whether a user intends it or not, an unencrypted router is broadcasting freely. An encrypted router, on the other hand, is not.
The parallel breaks down (as well as the 'stream' analogy) when you consider that web surfing is interactive. To do it, I have to send information into your router to get information out of it. Personally, I don't think that's significant. Others may. I think the line should be drawn right along that encryption option.
But IN NO WAY is me, standing on public property and interacting with your wireless router the same as me walking into your house and eating food out of your refrigerator, or even sitting down and watching your TV.
__________________
Rick <---This is me
I've decided not to engage in pig wrestling any more. Although I might poke a stick in the pen every once in a while just for fun. :stickpoke
My new favorite quote (attrributed to Mark Twain, although i haven't been able to confirm the attribution or the wording):
"Those who don't read the newspaper are uninformed.
Those who do read the newspaper are missinformed."
Like the Digital Underground once said, "Do Watcha Like."
And when your neighbor (safely invisible inside his humble abode), coupl'a houses down,
accesses your Wifi with some WEP decryption software to DL some "unsavory" web content.....
....what then?
He's just doin' what he likes.
The Laws in this guy's area seem to be well enough defined to get him caught.
....again, I hope they FRY his sorry butt!
.
.
.
.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
The difference centered around both the free and unlimited transmission of broadcast signals vs. the controlled delivery system of cable, as well as the cable users contractual agreement with the cable company that doesn't exist between broadcast companies and their viewers.
But the "delivery System" is via a Paid "Controlled Delivery System". ie; The Dial-up/Cable/DSL connection, paid for by the Subscriber.
.
.
.
.Sorry, I'm not "buyin" all these excuses for theft, plain & simple.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Puhleaze! Go after some real criminals. Many people purposely leave their Wi-Fi accessible so that their internet connection can be shared. I never think twice about connecting to an open Wi-Fi network. I guess I'm evil.
Also, I notice many people here refer to using WEP instead of WPA. Why is that?
If my laptop battery goes dead while I am outside your house on the unsecure Wi-Fi can I plug into an outside outlet to get power? Forget about the trespassing issue.
Many people purposely leave their Wi-Fi accessible so that their internet connection can be shared.
And those that do it "purposefully" have some knowledge of what they are doing and usually mark their Wifi with a moniker of "Free to Use", or some such.
Those ignorant of what they are doing should not be considered "I'm Free.....c'mon and use me!"
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Honestly, I'd rather have law enforcement and the judicial system concern itself with real criminals. I think you're all intelligent enough to figure out the types of crimes I'm talking about. At least I hope so. ;)
If my laptop battery goes dead while I am outside your house on the unsecure Wi-Fi can I plug into an outside outlet to get power? Forget about the trespassing issue.
I know I'm wasting my time, but...
If you use my electricity, I will be billed extra for your usage. If you tap into my open Wi-Fi network to access the internet through my account (with unlimited bandwidth) it doesn't cost me a cent more than I would be paying anyway. And if I don't want you to do it, I'll secure my network.
Like I said, I'm wasting my time. We can try to come up with these analogies 'til we're all blue in the face.
I logged on to an open network at lunch today. Made my post checked a few things and logged off. Did the isp charge that person more for my usage? NO!! DId I harm this person? NO!! Did I harm his property? NO!!! Do I have extra bandwith in my pockets that I did not have before? NO!! SO what is it again that I am stealing?
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Follow Us
RSS Feed
Follow on Twitter
Facebook
YouTube
Uber Member
