My Two Lincolns
@verizon.net
| So the point is...?
I knew someone who wanted help to configure her laptop...she did not subscribe to an ISP--instead a friend who lived next door in her apartment complex told her she could connect to his wireless router. This is an example of someone giving explicit consent to another person to tap into his Wi-Fi network.
On to the subject at hand. Here's my superficial take on this:
Does this mean it's OK for other people in adjacent apartments to have free rein to "steal" his Wi-Fi signal? Does he care? When will he care--when someone in the apartment complex goes marauding into his folders and files and steals his identity? The question is what happens to the two parties--the guy who was not smart enough to configure Wi-Fi security properly (pay with an expensive lesson and for the cost of repairing the damage) and the thug who goes on a shopping spree on this guy's dime (jail and a fine), maybe?
I may be wrong, but it sounds like some people here think the law shouldn't go after the bad guy because the other guy didn't take the proper time and effort to close his open network. In other words, the "bad" guy is not really a "bad" guy, just a "smart" guy who "intentionally" and "willfully" broke into the other guy's network, because, hey, he left the door open--it's his fault.
Some have said the legislation is not needed because there are other laws in place already. Really? I don't know that. Do you know that? Where in the Annotated Code of Maryland is this addressed specifically?
Just askin'... |
