Oh without a doubt he needs to be punished for it! I guess what I was saying was there are a few of us here who have maybe a more-than-good relationship with our neighbor(s) who feel that we trust them enough that it's ok to use or let them use existing open wifi connections.
QUOTE(darth_turtur @ Jul 12 2005, 02:23 PM)
I guess what we all need to remember is that not all of the people out there are like you folks. I'm sure that you would use an open node for the sake of having a port for your internet connection to access, I don't know, e-mail, play online games, etc. But there is still that population out there that maliciously use other people's, technically "property" for purposes that are disrespectful to others.
The case will get thrown out, It has absoloutely no leg to stand on. The thing is, unless it in enxcrypted it's free for anyone to use, It's not stealing unless you lower the quality of service they are paying for by lets say sucking up a ton of bandwidth, but if the service and quality goes unchange they are still recieving what they paid for and you aren't 'stealing' anything. Now where it becomes illegal to access is network is if there is any password prompt or anything where you would have to gain access illegaly by cracking it or such. Or if the owner personaly tells you that you can't use it. Other than that it's pretty much mutually agreed that an open wi-fi signal is up for grabs. It's no different than going to a friends house and watching sattelite because at your house you don't have it. Should he have asked to use it? yes. Does he have to? no because it's unprotected. Unless the judge is a baffoon and hasn't heard of a computer he will throw it out or give him a slap on the wrist with a few hours of community service.
A blind woman stands on a corner with a hand outstretched and in her palm is a $20 bill. Is it stealing to take it? I mean, its free for anyone to take right? Its not being used and its not like she'll notice any change?
Someone leaves their keys in their car, mabye on the cell phone and didnt think about it. Is it grand theft auto to come and take the car for a joy ride? I mean, its free for anyone to walk up and use right?
Uh, no, bullshit. Just cause you cant tell its missing doesnt mean the bandwidth wasnt stolen. You point a gun at someones head, what happens? 25-life. Does it change if the person didnt realize you were pointing the gun at them? "But sir, he didnt even notice the gun was pointed at his head" "Well, I guess your right, alright, community service, you rascal you".
Those analogies aren't accurate. The thing is when you pay for internet access you pay for performance, download and upload rate, now bandwidth does effect that, but you can easily have multiple computers on the same network without seeing a drop in performance. As for taking the money from the woman it's different, now it would be stealing if the person paid per hour per computer on the internet like 56k, but if it was a standard fee it is no different than watching cable that you don't own at someones house or going to a lan party and using their internet. It's not illegal to share internet or everyone who had a lan party would be arrested but it is illegal to use someones internet if they don't want to you. Now if it is unprotected it's not implied that they don't want you on their network but if it's protect with any sort of protection it is implied and it's illegal access of a network. Same with if they ask you to stop. They really have no grounds whatsoever unless they can prove the owner attempted to secure the network somehow. I can go to starbucks hop on the wi-fi and if they ask me to stop I have to legally but I never have to ask to get on, they couldn't come over and arrest me because I was stealing, It is unprotected and free for people to use.
Well, very good points, I still dont agree but oh well. I suppose this is a two sided street, it can be looked at that the guy was stealing, and it can be viewed that he simply used a internet connection free and available to him. I wont change my mind and it doesnt sound like you'll change yours.
The main reason this case is getting alot of attention is because it is a gray area that the law doesn't state if it's illegal or legal. Alot of people shout out that it's obvious that it isn't while people say it is and when you turn to the books to answere it for you it's another example of where the law hasn't caught up with the technology so it hangs soley in the persons interpetation of what exactly is theft and is it really wrong to use someones wi-fi that is not protected. I don't think this case will amount to anything and will most likely get thrown out, certainly not 5 years in prison, but it may lead to revisions in the law where they outline this sort of activity as illegal and that I believe is why it's getting alot of attention.