Fezmid Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Man arrested for using stores internet access (he was sitting in his car, in the stores parking lot) Another arrest has been made over someone leeching a WiFi network without authorization, this time in Michigan. The leecher could have faced a five-year prison sentence and a $10,000 penalty but won't since it's his first offense. I've seen that Michigan case before -- but never saw what the result was. I'd be shocked if he even had to pay a fine. And to reinforce the "gray" area: "Coincidentally, the cafe owner that Peterson was leeching WiFi off of didn't even realize that what Peterson was doing was a crime at the time. Neither did the police officer. "I had a feeling a law was being broken, but I didn't know exactly what," Sparta police chief Andrew Milanowski told the TV station." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 More like you knock on their door, and their butler answers the door and lets you use the bathroom or telephone. The computer asks permission, the router grants permission. Not fuzzy at all. What if the butler says you can use the batroom for free plus optional tip even though he doesn't own the bathroom? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebug Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 What if the butler says you can use the batroom for free plus optional tip even though he doesn't own the bathroom? I think the lesson here, is to lock up your butler. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 How is an end user supposed to know whether it's a free public hot-spot or a private router broadcasting for all to use? Most people who have their PC's wireless turned on don't actually pick from a list -- they just connect to whatever is broadcasting in range (or at least that's a setting). That makes it even more of a gray area, IMHO. Oh, as I said, I agree that, in practice, as long as the use is lawful, and you aren't attempting to compromise someone's computer, I think it is hard to call use of an open connection "illegal". Of course, it is possible that you KNOW the signal is from your neighbor and that the neighbor does not want you using his/her connection...but, let's put that aside for a moment. I have problems with the justification of "if they didn't want it used, they would enable security". I can tell you, many many people are totally unaware of the security measures they should be taking. And, we shouldn't assume that people who are behind the security curve (and not up to speed with ever changing technology...like my 85 year old father, for instance), are somehow fair game for those with more technical knowledge. I believe it shouldn't be considered illegal (in most circumstances) because, for the average user, it is sometimes hard to know what is, and isn't, a legit public connection and because it has little-to-no negative consequences for the person whose service is used. But, i reject the "should know better" argument for many reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Don't leave your lawnmower outside and go in for a drink. Someone could load it into their truck, go cut their lawn, and return it. You should have secured it. What if your neighbor is a serial killer and uses the lawnmower for something other than mowing the lawn? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 When you connect to an unsecured wireless network, your computer and router have this conversation: PC: Is there anybody out there with a network connection? Router: I'm here! PC: May I connect to you? Router: Sure can! PC: Will you please give me an IP address and tell me what your gateway is? Router: You may use IP 1.2.3.4 and gateway 1.2.3.254 PC: Thank you! So this isn't much different than knocking on someone's door to use their bathroom or telephone, except the computers are doing the talking. Shouldn't be illegal, but the laws haven't been tested much. Fezmid wins this thread. There is no way on earth this can be illegal, because now I can have my IPhone in my pocket and it can connect to networks without me even knowing about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 There is no way on earth this can be illegal, because now I can have my IPhone in my pocket and it can connect to networks without me even knowing about it. Are you suggesting that the iPhone uses private wi-fi connections to access the Internet? That really doesn't sound right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Are you suggesting that the iPhone uses private wi-fi connections to access the Internet? That really doesn't sound right. My iPod Touch (basically an iPhone without the phone capabilities... Ok, that sounds dumb, but you know what I mean) does that so you can surf YouTube. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justnzane Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Jeebus, if this is illegal, I can say out of the 5,000 or so posts I have made here, that maybe 1500 were on legal lines. That said, maybe I shouldn't have been downloading porn off of the neighbor's connection? Then again, is downloadin Bree Olsen (NSFW) a crime? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Are you suggesting that the iPhone uses private wi-fi connections to access the Internet? That really doesn't sound right. My laptop will connect to any wifi network it can find if I have the settings turned on properly for it. Just to complicate things further...those settings happen to be the default settings. So if my brand new laptop computer connects to a wireless network because the default settings cause it to without any knowledge or input on my part, am I breaking the law, is Dell, or is Microsoft? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justnzane Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 My laptop will connect to any wifi network it can find if I have the settings turned on properly for it. Just to complicate things further...those settings happen to be the default settings. So if my brand new laptop computer connects to a wireless network because the default settings cause it to without any knowledge or input on my part, am I breaking the law, is Dell, or is Microsoft? Does that mean we can sue Bill Gates for trillions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 More like you knock on their door, and their butler answers the door and lets you use the bathroom or telephone. The computer asks permission, the router grants permission. Not fuzzy at all. Too bad the router can't tell the owner that someone used it, like the butler would tell the owner. You presume that if somebody is unaware of the security features of their router, that's tantamount to permission. I don't, and most reasonable people wouldn't either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Mountain View, CA has citywide Wi-Fi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 My laptop will connect to any wifi network it can find if I have the settings turned on properly for it. Just to complicate things further...those settings happen to be the default settings. So if my brand new laptop computer connects to a wireless network because the default settings cause it to without any knowledge or input on my part, am I breaking the law, is Dell, or is Microsoft? Exactly. That's the main reason I think it would/should be hard (in most cases) to prosecute this sort of thing. But, I was questioning the statement that the iPhone did the same thing. I thought the iPhone used a devoted network to access the internet, and didn't rely on the availability of private, unsecured, wi-fi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Too bad the router can't tell the owner that someone used it, like the butler would tell the owner. You presume that if somebody is unaware of the security features of their router, that's tantamount to permission. I don't, and most reasonable people wouldn't either. I agree with you, and that's why I don't use that reason to justify/defend using unsecured wi-fi. But, IMO, you don't need that reason, as there are other, better reasons, to defend it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 But, I was questioning the statement that the iPhone did the same thing. I thought the iPhone used a devoted network to access the internet, and didn't rely on the availability of private, unsecured, wi-fi. It will connect at either, and AT&T's preference is that you connect to the Internet via wifi. Come to think, it's also the user's preference too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 It will connect at either, and AT&T's preference is that you connect to the Internet via wifi. Come to think, it's also the user's preference too. Ah...I guess that makes more sense, then. But, if you are walking down the street, and turn it on, will it connect to an unknown/unsecured wi-fi from a house you are passing, just to lose the signal moments later? It would seem like connecting to your home's/office's wi-fi first, makes sense, but not to an unknown network. I would think you would want the AT&T net, in those circumstances...no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Ah...I guess that makes more sense, then. But, if you are walking down the street, and turn it on, will it connect to an unknown/unsecured wi-fi from a house you are passing, just to lose the signal moments later? It would seem like connecting to your home's/office's wi-fi first, makes sense, but not to an unknown network. I would think you would want the AT&T net, in those circumstances...no? If you need the net while you're mobile, then wifi doesn't make sense, and you'd be on AT&T's 3G network. But if you're sitting in a park or S'bucks, then wifi is the better option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Ignorance of the law is no defense. Ignorance of technology is another thing, entirely. You know, enough already. You make it sound like people just wish for a wireless network at their house and -- PRESTO -- it simply appears out of thin air. Someone has to install a router, and if you're either smart enough to have someone set it up (like your service provider) or smart enough to figure out how to do it yourself, you're smart enough to set up a freaking password. In other words, you can't possibly be smart enough to get wireless set up in your house and yet, somehow, also be too ignorant to understand the security part of it. If you're that !@#$ing stupid, you're too !@#$ing stupid to know people are using your network. I appreciate your defending the ignorant, but seriously...for a guy who's talked himself out of being shot on four different occasions, your argument on this is ridiculously sappy. If you want to defend the world, leave the ignorant for your spare time because most of the time you just can't fix ignorant, and defending them only prolongs the pain for everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Don't leave your lawnmower outside and go in for a drink. Someone could load it into their truck, go cut their lawn, and return it. You should have secured it. I wouldn't mind... Just as long as they didn't break and left it full with fuel! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts