joebear29
join:2003-07-20
Alabaster, AL
1 edit | The school can ban certain networks if it wishes
quote:
Legally, the college has absolutely no right to try and regulate use of the 2.4GHz spectrum.
What does that mean? Of course they can't regulate the spectrum, just like they cannot regulate how coca-cola is made. They can bar students from bringing coca-cola into certain buildings, and they can ban them from using "unauthorized" Wi-Fi. Hell, they can even ban all students from having laptops on campus if they wanted to.
I agree the rule is stupid, but the school has the right to implement it. |
|
Steve
I'm a PC, so shut up
Consultant
join:2001-03-10
Yorba Linda, CA
| "Absolutely no right"?
Huh? There are only so many possible wireless access points that can fit in a given area, and an enterprise often spends considerable effort to spread the access points around such that they don't interfere with each other (say, putting the same channels on the opposite sides of the campus).
Demanding that members of that enterprise not interfere with that seems really reasonable to me.
Steve
--
Stephen J. Friedl * Security Consultant * Tustin, California USA * my web site |
|
fundamentalz
The Basics
Premium
join:2004-04-30
Moorpark, CA
1 edit | Why?
im not seeing why a college student would need their own wireless network. |
|
vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Jamaica Plain, MA | How will the catch students?
Are they really going to do a fox-hunt with direction-finding equipment? If they do, how will they know they're not following a 2.4G cordless phone signal? |
|
tomkb
Premium
join:2000-11-15
Avon, OH
clubs: | yes but
They are just going to irritate the rank and file, to the point where they will all just turn them on and ruin it for everyone. |
|
navalpatel
join:2003-07-28
Lubbock, TX | Umm... not exactly
they do have the right to say how their campus internet is used |
|
vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Jamaica Plain, MA | reply to joebear29
Re: The school can ban certain networks if it wishes
As a state-run school, they have less leeway to implement arbitrary policies. Being that the spectrum is crowded, there may be a rational basis for this rule, though. |
|
navalpatel
join:2003-07-28
Lubbock, TX | reply to fundamentalz
Re: Why?
a laptop in his or her dorm room ... they may want to sit on their bed do the work, take it in the hall ... another room close by... back to topic now... |
|
Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL | Silly news item
What a waste of space this item is.
That last sentence about the legality of regulating the spectrum is silly and almost seems to be a trolling comment.
Everyone that has posted so far before me is right on. |
|
joebear29
join:2003-07-20
Alabaster, AL
| reply to vpoko
Re: The school can ban certain networks if it wishes
said by vpoko  :
As a state-run school, they have less leeway to implement arbitrary policies. Being that the spectrum is crowded, there may be a rational basis for this rule, though.
Even as a state-run institution, they can be as arbitrary as they wish so long as they do not violate the Constitution, civil rights laws' or an individual's due process.
Or to put it differently, they can have inane, arbitrary rules, but as state run institution they cannot be arbitrary in enforcement and must provide due process to those accused. But there is no requirement the rule by a good one, so long as it is semi-rational. If they want to ban gum from an auditorium, they don't have to prove that people are sticking their gum under the desks, they can just ban it. |
|
StingerMoD
join:2002-10-16
Calgary, AB | reply to fundamentalz
Re: Why?
So they can have their own P2P network where they can share music? Nabie the RIAA had some intervention? |
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| reply to Steve
Re: "Absolutely no right"?
Reasonable to some, but I'm willing to bet you'd find some legal difficulties depending on what constitutes "disciplinary action"....
»hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/a···44A1.pdf
There's still plenty of debate over whether a landlord or a spectrum user has the right of way.... |
|
inteller
Sociopaths always win.
join:2003-12-08
Tulsa, OK | Well I see the solution to this.
Plant the hotspots off campus, with high gain point to point links into campus connected to the person's client. Technically the on campus person isn't running a hot spot, just connected to one. |
|
warriors
It's A Great Time Out
join:2001-06-05
Alviso, CA | United States has 49 states and Texas.
Ban Wi-Fi? Go Figure! |
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02 | reply to Goober
Re: Silly news item
How is it silly?
They're threatening legal action over something that's still very murky in regards to the law, opening themselves up to significant damages if a court teeters one way or the other.... |
|
apsinkus
join:2002-06-25
Chicago, IL
| it won't stand up in court
FCC Part 15 rules don't allow ANYBODY but FCC to regulate 2.4G range. HAMs have priority in this band and others are secondary users (including this school). Since those kids are feeding their access points with broadband from SBC or Comcast, school has NO RIGHT to tell them what to do.
You will see, if this goes to court, school will be the looser.
Also, what is a WISP sold a connection to one of those kids and pointed a fine strong sector at that building? School would loose to. I have a feeling UT is just doing this, because they think that students can't afford to sue.
School can only require that those APs are not connected to school network.
Imagine this, a municipality tells everybody that only city APs are allowed and nobody else is allowed in a 2.4G range. This will hold up in court like my argument that I deserve a Lamborghini for free.
Sorry guys, but most of you are wrong here, read the laws. |
|
joebear29
join:2003-07-20
Alabaster, AL
1 edit | reply to Karl Bode
Re: "Absolutely no right"?
Well, you have an argument there, but I suspect the court would come down on the side on the school, but it would place an additional burden on the school to prove its reasonable.
But a school can still regulate its students more than you might think. At my college, many students faced "disciplinary action" for being in the dorm room of the wrong gender after a certain hour, even if he/she was behaving themselves. If a school can regulate when a student can visit another in the dorms (something, say, an apartment generally cannot do) then I have little doubt that they can regulate whether a student can set up a wireless network on campus. Students in dorms have less rights than a general renter.
But I like the new phrasing on the summary better. "Some would argue" is a more accurate description than "absolutely no right". |
|
navalpatel
join:2003-07-28
Lubbock, TX | Not Unique
By the way - this isn't unique, Texas Tech University does this as well, UT (I believe), UTA, and A & M (I believe). |
|
Steve
I'm a PC, so shut up
Consultant
join:2001-03-10
Yorba Linda, CA
| reply to Karl Bode
Re: "Absolutely no right"?
said by Karl Bode :
There's still plenty of debate over whether a landlord or a spectrum user has the right of way....
Well in this case, "landlord" has nothing to do with it: en loco parentis-type reasoning has been dramatically on the upswing, with colleges legally being able to do nearly anything in the place of the parent.
Steve
--
Stephen J. Friedl * Security Consultant * Tustin, California USA * my web site |
|
n2jtx
join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY
 ·Optimum Online
| So 2.4GHz is crowded...
The students should run 802.11a (5GHz) access points instead and see what happens. Then it can be determined if the school is trying to prevent interference or trying to protect a monopoly.
--
I support the right to keep and arm bears. |
|
