russotto
join:2000-10-05
Collegeville, PA
| So what's unauthorized use?
Hmm. So I (through my WiFi card) request authentication to your WiFi router, your router says, "OK, go ahead". I then request an association to your router, and your router says "No Problem". Then I ask for an IP address, some DNS servers, and a gateway to the Internet, and your router says "Here you go", and this is somehow unauthorized? |
|
RainWind
join:2000-10-20
Van Wert, OH
| The door was unlocked, so I thought I would come in. What's this... a 60" plasma? Well now, there's no lock and chain on it. Lets just walk this baby out to my van...
Just because you can walk in and take things doesn't mean its right. The bill is meant to stop people who knowingly connect to networks they have no right connecting to.
I seem to notice a lot of the "if you're not actively stopping me it must be OK" mentality in this thread. Since when does no opposition mean its ok to steal? If its not yours don't touch it. If the owner wanted you to play with it they would have put a "free wi-fi" sticker on their door like they do at taco bell.
A person shouldn't have to lock their door. Other people should have the common courtesy to not walk into a person's house uninvited. It seems that somehow over time the younger generations have lost common courtesy and respect. There's this "give me now!" mentality. They don't really care who owns it or who built it.. they think it should be theirs to use as they please without needing permission.
People need to keep their hands off things that don't belong to them. Whether or not you can use it is a moot point. Its not yours so you shouldn't even be thinking about using it.
If a person knowingly connects to another person's network they need to be fined. Its theft, just the same as hooking yourself up with free cable. If your PC loses connection to a router you're authorized to use and it happens to pick up the nearest available network automatically that's far different than purposefully accessing a network because you're too cheap to pay for your own. The bill adresses the issue of people purposefully accessing other networks, not accidental access because of the way wifi is set up. |
|
TamaraB
Question The Current Paradigm
Premium
join:2000-11-08
Underway
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| said by RainWind  : ...I seem to notice a lot of the "if you're not actively stopping me it must be OK" mentality ... Not at all! There is a big difference between entering an unlocked house uninvited, and entering a house with a sign on the door saying "ENTER, all welcome". You don't see the difference?
Bob
--
Motor Vessel - Tamara B.
43' Long-Range Trawler
Cape Elizebeth ME.
See her Here. |
|
lupa luna
@verizon.net
| Going in to someones house (or even setting foot on there land even)is trespassing. These wifi signals are comming over to my property. If that signal is on my property then I should have a right to do as I please with it. it's like saying that if the porch light from my neigbers house shines on to my yard and i don't have to turn on my porch light because of that, Am I stealing electricity? |
|
russotto
join:2000-10-05
Collegeville, PA
edit:
March 21st, @02:43PM
| reply to RainWind
said by RainWind :The door was unlocked, so I thought I would come in. The door's not just unlocked. It's wide open, with a sign in front saying "Pool inside, come on in, the water's fine".
yours don't touch it. If the owner wanted you to play with it they would have put a "free wi-fi" sticker on their door like they do at taco bell. They DID put an electronic "free wi-fi sticker". It's included right in the broadcast message the router is putting out. It says "Anyone may connect to me". |
|
Simba7
join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT
| reply to RainWind
said by RainWind :If the owner wanted you to play with it they would have put a "free wi-fi" sticker on their door like they do at taco bell. I hope you're kidding.. Seriously..
said by RainWind :If a person knowingly connects to another person's network they need to be fined. Its theft, just the same as hooking yourself up with free cable. If your PC loses connection to a router you're authorized to use and it happens to pick up the nearest available network automatically that's far different than purposefully accessing a network because you're too cheap to pay for your own. The bill adresses the issue of people purposefully accessing other networks, not accidental access because of the way wifi is set up. I'm glad I'm a little more open than you about this. If you read on the next page, you'll see my post explaining our network.
I don't mind people accessing my network to check their email or just look something up. Heck, we were in their position at one time and we were very grateful. Some people are just a little more open about "Internet for Everyone" than others I guess.
..and like I said.. If it's an unsecure, open network that someone bought a wireless router and just "plugged it in", then it's their own damn fault for not reading the manual. |
|
dglenn
@BELIEVEWIRELESS.NET
| reply to RainWind
A better analogy
A better analogy, since we are talking about 'unauthorized use' rather than 'theft' after all:
You enter a building, uninvited, to try to set up an appointment with someone there, and you're asked to wait in the lobby. You see a television, DVD player, and stack of DVDs. If you turn on the telly and pop in a DVD to kill time while you wait, are you guilty of 'theft of services' or 'unauthorised use'?
And, much like the real world WiFi situations, whether you answer 'yes' or 'no', I can change a parameter and ask "what about now?" -- not to trap you into an absurd position (unless you take an absurdly absolutist position all the way on the always-stealing or always-okay end of the range), but to 1: try to find out where you think the line is, and 2: to illustrate that it's not so black-and-white as many people on both sides seem to think.
Does it matter whether the DVDs are rented, purchased, or home movies? Does it matter whether they were left there for that purpose or just set down for a while by somebody who needed their hands free for something else? Does it matter whether there's a sign either encouraging or discouraging use of the television ... or how prominent or obscure such a sign is if there is one? Are magazines in waiting rooms an 'unauthorized sharing' of the doctor's subscription and thus 'theft' from the publisher because you read them for free? Can I read the front page of the newspaper I didn't pay for that the person across the subway car from me is holding up while she reads the inside pages? Do people with car stereos you can hear indoors two blocks away owe the rights-holders of the songs they play "public performance" royalties? Okay, I snuck that last one in because I live on a noisy street and a lot of people are jerks like that, but it is related if you squint at it. Is it 'stealing' free music if I listen to my neighbour practicing violin? Does it make it more like stealing or less, if he plays bagpipes instead, or a lute?
Not only are the situations in some of the analogies ambiguous or 'grey', the very fact that it's not obvious EXACTLY which analogy fits best demonstrates that this is not an "obvious" or sharply-defined question.
And IMNSHO, all of my examples are better fits for this topic than "if you leave your keys in your car and somebody takes it" or most of the other attempts I've seen here so far. |
|
