how-to block ads
|
Comments on news posted 2003-09-26 12:30:30: Ohio cable modem uncappers who were greeted by FBI agents on their doorstop last year receive varying degrees of punishment. ..
| |
 
plk
bo may sleep in loft
Premium
join:2002-04-20
Ogden, IA | Contract? What contract? Same boat. I was on before the system went public and never signed anything. I don't know how, nor do I think I would uncap, but sure would like 3 mbps down and 386k up. | |
| | mjcrocket
Mjc
join:2000-12-02
Abingdon, MD
| Re: Contract? What contract? You do not have to sign anything! By your continued use of the service you are agreeing to all terms and conditions spelled out by your provider WITHOUT qualification on your part!
When was the last time you went to your provider's WEB site to read the TOS or AUP? You say never? | |
| 
richk_1957
If ..Then..Else
Premium
join:2001-04-11
Minas Tirith
|  long distance comment.....
But seriously, I don't think that bandwidth is a commodity that you can steal. Besides the fact[now since I don't have a cable modem, with restrictions, I may be wrong here in may ways, but bear with me] that what you are doing when you alter the 'cap', you are changing the maximum speed. Unless you're a gamer, or download huge amounts [which is certainly possible] you usually don't use your whole bandwidth allocation, anyway
Aside from everything I just said, this is a crime between the user and his provider. A civil crime. If the provider wanted to make a stink, all they had to do is terminate the service and send him a letter 'we have found that you are xxxxx. To restore your service you must pay yyy and remove all modifications'. And then if he balks, then take him to court. There is no reason for law enforcement to get into the act. And the FBI? Well I think that the crime (?) has to entail a significant loss and/or cross state borders. From all the posts I have read, this occurred where the provider [Buckeye] and the people who altered the caps were both in Ohio. So how did they get into the act? | |
| Shadow6962
join:2003-10-07
| What is the Law?, No Spill Blood
please post. this has time and time again been skirted.
again! what Law or Laws are being broken? #'s please, so that we all can look them up and read them ourselves.
keep in mind that excuses are like buttholes, everyone has one, and they all stink! | |
| yaspan
join:2001-11-27
Vancouver, BC |  About to jump into the deep end
ooo0o^o^o0ooo | |
| rx7mike
join:2004-01-23
West Bend, WI
| yadda Ok so charters AUP does not say anything about its modem in it. Does that mean there is a legal loophole and I can uncap? NO! The only thing charter has in the AUP is a hacking section (i.e. no hacking,spoofing,sniffing) And an excessive bandwith policy, that basicaly says if you use to much bandwith we will charge you more. | |
| Enkrypt2000
join:2004-02-28
Toledo, OH
1 edit | Buckeye went after subscribers in Michigan too. Buckeye came after two people in Michigan. The prosecutor dismissed all charges concerning my case because of a lack of evidence almost two years ago. I just recently found out from my lawyer that they are bringing the charges back up and that there is a warrant out for my arrest. I was charged with the following crime:
FRAUDULENT ACCESS TO COMPUTERS, COMPUTER SYSTEMS, AND COMPUTER NETWORKS
Act 53 of 1979
AN ACT to prohibit access to computers, computer systems, and computer networks for certain fraudulent purposes; to prohibit intentional and unauthorized access, alteration, damage, and destruction of computers, computer systems, computer networks, computer software programs, and data; and to prescribe penalties.
History: 1979, Act 53, Eff. Mar. 27, 1980 .
»www.michiganlegislature.org/mile···computer
 | |
| 
BlockHole
@aol.com
| Let's set the record straight... It was the FBI who prepared the affidavit for the search warrants and executed the warrants, along with others.
It was the FBI who did the forensic analysis of the computers.
Relative to George Runner:
1. He never signed a contract of any kind with Buckeye.
2. He was never furnished a TOS or Acceptable Use Agreement nor advised of the existence of such documents.
3. These agreements were posted in PDF format only on their website & Runner learned of that only AFTER the search warrants were served.
4. Buckeye never disclosed that they capped modem speeds but advertised that the provided "the full speed of the internet" and never disclosed what the actual bandwidth was.
5. Shryock, the Buckeye lackey who filed the police report stated therein "Suspect exceed his contracted bandwidth". This was a complete lie.
All of the above facts were undisputed by the prosecution and now you know why the case was dismissed by the judge. Not only was this not a criminal offense, but did not even amount to a breach of contract, because there no contract. | |
| geobucks3
join:2004-12-11
Toledo, OH
| George Runner responds... A little late to the party...some cromagnon idiots posted here, but this is the bottom line (hope you "stupids" out there can fathom)
1. Never saw or signed a contract, TOS, Acceptable Use Agreement, or any document....(posted only on their website and in Acrobat format which was never disclosed and I never saw.)
2. Phuckeye (Buckeye) continually advertized the "full speed", "unlimited access" of/to the internet.
3. Friend (Gateway tech from Nebraska) sent me a script to reconfig modem for more speed. Never once thought illegal.
4. Never got close to speeds that Paul Shyrock perjured himself at grand jury testified to, but did increase by about 3X on download.
5. Actually shared with neighbors and their speed increased as well. No decrease for them.
6. Just one phone call from Phuckeye, and I would have immediately quit...not a sadist, am I.
7. Court totally agreeded. Wish the other 6 had competent attorneys. My attorney was just a conduit for my motions, memorandae, etc., but this was legal abuse and I feel bad for the others who were 'phuckeyed" by the Toledo Blade and the Lucas County Prosecutor's Office (A personal agenda to get me).
more, but I quit... | |
| | | |
|
