 NOYBSt. John 3.16Premium join:2005-12-15 Forest Grove, OR kudos:1 | My Door Is Not Locked != Help Yourself"It was also collected solely from people who couldn't be bothered to secure their Wi-Fi routers -- which means security and privacy pretty clearly weren't high on their action item lists anyway."
So an unlocked door makes it legal to steal my belongings? I don't think so.
-- Be a Good Netizen - Read, Know & Complain About Overly Restrictive Tyrannical ISP ToS & AUP »comcast.net/terms/ »verizon.net/policies/ Say Thanks with a Tool Points Donation | |
|
 |  cacoPremium join:2005-03-10 Whittier, AK 2 edits | Re: My Door Is Not Locked != Help Yourself Big difference between breaking into your house and what Google did. This is a money grab plain and simple. | |
|
 |  |  Reviews:
·Cox HSI
·World Lynx
| Re: My Door Is Not Locked != Help Yourself said by caco:Big difference between breaking into your house and what Google did. This is a money grab plain and simple. +1 .... someone looking to get PAID..... someone sniffed their unsecured wireless..... tough tacos....
They were asking for it and should have known better. Just like leaving your house unlocked.....someone sooner or later will discover it and exploit that fact....
 | |
|
 |  Host: Road Runner PC gaming GAMES PC gaming Tech
2 edits | So an unlocked door makes it legal to steal my belongings? That's not what's being said, and besides, that metaphor is old and boring.
A more fun metaphor? If you're standing buck naked on your porch within full view of the road -- yet complaining about people not respecting your privacy, I would think much of the problem would involve you. Especially if you then proceed to launch a lawsuit pretending you care about privacy when you weren't willing to don so much as a bathrobe... | |
|
 |  |  Yezidi join:2009-11-17 Brooklyn, NY | Re: My Door Is Not Locked != Help Yourself Both metaphors are incorrect. They assume volition on the part of those with unsecured routers. Most people who buy routers are unaware of the necessity to secure them and the manufacturers set the defaults to the least secure options. | |
|
 |  |  |  | | Re: My Door Is Not Locked != Help Yourself I'm sorry, but that's bullshit. In every single piece of documentation that comes with a consumer grade router, one of the first things it recommends you do is SECURE YOUR ROUTER. That means change its default password and put encryption on it. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  FutureMonKeep your Mitts off RMoneyPremium,ExMod 2002-05 join:2000-10-05 Seaside, CA 1 edit | Re: My Door Is Not Locked != Help Yourself Not to mention the fact that it's become standard practice (at least in my area) that when cable or dsl wireless modems are installed by technicians, they automatically set them up with WEP or WPA/WPA2 so they are secure out of the gate. In this case, you'd have to purposely disable that security yourself to open the router up for public access.
- FM | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  | | Ummm No Ignorance is no excuse! | |
|
 |  |  |  |  james join:2001-02-26 CWCville USA | Re: My Door Is Not Locked != Help Yourself said by FLATLINE:Ummm No Ignorance is no excuse! Indeed, there is no exuse for not having any ignorance! | |
|
 |  |  dpp3530 join:2002-11-02 Bethel Park, PA | said by Karl Bode:So an unlocked door makes it legal to steal my belongings? That's not what's being said, and besides, that metaphor is old and boring. Even better metaphor. I'm selling my house and Century 21 comes in and puts up one of those signs that has the AM radio transmitter. "This house at 3701 Forest Road, Bethel Park, PA is a three bedroom colonial and the asking price is $300,000."
Now the Google truck is driving by, and their radio is tuned to that frequency - because all of those signs operate on the same frequency. As they drive by, they pick up "Park, PA is". Technically, that's personal information they picked up -- part of my address.
Can I sue? No, I'm publicly broadcasting this information across the airwaves. If you have an unsecured WAP, guess what, you're broadcasting personal information across the airwaves. If someone happens to hear it, don't start whining that they shouldn't have been listening. Lock it down so they can't! | |
|
 |  james join:2001-02-26 CWCville USA | Sorry chief, the law specifically refers to intentional interception of communications and intent to disclose it. Google has done neither.
This isn't google breaking into peoples houses who have unlocked doors and taking street view pictures. This is a naked dude standing on his porch (as Karl said) and complaining that google took a picture inadvertently while driving by. -- [bquote= Metatron2008 ] But people who download thousands of movies and games.... Yes, they are as bad as any murderer[/bquote] | |
|
 |  |  | | Re: My Door Is Not Locked != Help Yourself Close, its actually irrelevant whether they intended to intercept it or intended to disclose it in this case. 18 USC 2511 contains this exception:
(g) It shall not be unlawful under this chapter or chapter 121 of this title for any personâ (v) [or] for other users of the same frequency to intercept any radio communication made through a system that utilizes frequencies monitored by individuals engaged in the provision or the use of such system, if such communication is not scrambled or encrypted.
Since WiFi is an unlicensed radio band, everyone is a user, thus everyone can monitor it as much as they wish. | |
|
 |  |  |  FutureMonKeep your Mitts off RMoneyPremium,ExMod 2002-05 join:2000-10-05 Seaside, CA | Re: My Door Is Not Locked != Help Yourself agreed. I wouldn't call it "intentional interception" either.
To the analogy of the guy standing on his porch naked, this would be more like him standing there and yelling at the passers-by to make sure they looked at him, then claiming they violated his privacy.
The devices that are "looking" aren't breaking any laws. If they get a response, and happen to connect as a result, privacy laws shouldn't apply because the machine was unsecured. You might as well try to sue people for leaving you messages on your answering machine. After all, they used your electricity when they caused your answering machine to kick on and record their message.
You can't really compare this to privacy of a physical nature.
- FM | |
|
 |  |  |  |  japPremium join:2003-08-10 038xx | Re: My Door Is Not Locked != Help Yourself said by FutureMon:To the analogy of the guy standing on his porch naked, this would be more like him standing there and yelling at the passers-by to make sure they looked at him, then claiming they violated his privacy. You've come very close to established case law (USA) and it does make a good analogy for the topic at hand (unlike the silly "door unlocked/locked).
It's acceptable to walk around your house with the windows unobstructed as long as you are not soliciting attention (eg: dancing at the window with a light on yourself). On the porch you are exposing yourself (pun noted, not intentional) to legit obscenity complains. "At the glass" applies to practically all division of built-structure property usage rights. This includes federal historic zones: non-historic commercial signage affixed to the inside of your glass pane is permitted, outer face of glass is not. Of course you're a jerk either way and no sympathy if someone puts a rock through but that's another matter.
Kinda blows my mind people even argue that RF signals I throw off my property shouldn't be read by anyone who cares to, secured signals excepted. | |
|
 |  | | "So an unlocked door makes it legal to steal my belongings?"
Wow that's a pretty original analogy. Did you come up with that on your own? | |
|
 |  DarkLogixPremium join:2008-10-23 Baytown, TX kudos:3 | as others have said its more like some fool standing in the street nude and complaining that people are seeing him | |
|
 |  DarkLogixPremium join:2008-10-23 Baytown, TX kudos:3 | just go to »www.wigle.net/ and see more data than google got on wifi | |
|
 |  |  Reviews:
·WOW Internet and..
| Re: My Door Is Not Locked != Help Yourself oh i'm sure someone besides Wigle.net complied that. You tell me how they were able to plop those SSIDs down on a map like that and make them right where every building is located. My City Hall building, police department, my employer's networks are listed as well as the police department where i work.
But that site will be pulled shortly. -- www.twopugsbrand.com Kosher, Vegan, and Organic Certified Dog and Cat treats/foods and other products! | |
|
 |  |  |  FBGuyyippee ki yayPremium join:2005-03-19 Reviews:
·Comcast
·T-Mobile US
·AT&T U-Verse
2 edits | Re: My Door Is Not Locked != Help Yourself said by hottboiinnc:oh i'm sure someone besides Wigle.net complied that. You tell me how they were able to plop those SSIDs down on a map like that and make them right where every building is located. My City Hall building, police department, my employer's networks are listed as well as the police department where i work. But that site will be pulled shortly. nope. that site has been in service since 2001. I've contributed some myself. ever heard of wardriving? I do it just to make a map of networks. It uses special software that combines GPS coordinates with SSID information. I don't connect to any open networks or try to break into any encrypted ones. I just make a map of it. nothing more. -- sbcglobal.net speedtest result 11/11/09 - 5256kbps u-verse line stats: »c0wz.beevomit.org/ | |
|
 |  |  |  birdfeedrPremium,MVM join:2001-08-11 Warwick, RI kudos:5 | said by hottboiinnc:But that site will be pulled shortly. Big deal. My network is on wigle's map. But it's secured as posted elsewhere below. They captured mine because they tracked down a main road which I'm near. If I lived further down my street, I'd be off that list, because the driver didn't get paid enough to drive all over.
Can I join a class action suit? | |
|
 |  |  |  |  DarkLogixPremium join:2008-10-23 Baytown, TX kudos:3 | Re: My Door Is Not Locked != Help Yourself wigle.net didn't use google data just good ol war driving
they don't get paid at all | |
|
 |  |  |  DarkLogixPremium join:2008-10-23 Baytown, TX kudos:3 | sorry bub but the site has been around longer than google maps (2001)
it won't be pulled anytime soon and nothing they're doing is actually illegal | |
|
 |  PDXPLT join:2003-12-04 Banks, OR | Google didn't "enter" anything. What they did was *NOT* "wardriving", which involves attaching to a WiFi network without authorization, and possibly accessing computer network resources without permission; that's illegal in most places.
What they did was sniff (only receive) packets; packets that were sent in the clear on an unlicensed radio band that available for use by all.
A better analogy is if you're communicating with your neighbor by means of signs you stick in your lawn, so the neighbor can read them, and you get upset that Google reads them as they drive by. It's not reasonable to have any expectation of privacy for these messages. | |
|
 |  |  |
 |  |  |  DarkLogixPremium join:2008-10-23 Baytown, TX kudos:3 | Re: Bad analogy correct war driving is just a quick pass by sniffing for ap's and logging the GPS location and any ap info it can grab | |
|
 |  |  |  |  Simba7I Void Warranties join:2003-03-24 Billings, MT | Re: Bad analogy said by DarkLogix:correct war driving is just a quick pass by sniffing for ap's and logging the GPS location and any ap info it can grab My Touch Pro can do that with WiFiFoFum. | |
|
 |  |  Anonymous_AnonymousPremium join:2004-06-21 127.0.0.1 kudos:2 Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
·Comcast
·Time Warner VOIP
| said by PDXPLT:Google didn't "enter" anything. What they did was *NOT* "wardriving", which involves attaching to a WiFi network without authorization, and possibly accessing computer network resources without permission; that's illegal in most places. What they did was sniff (only receive) packets; packets that were sent in the clear on an unlicensed radio band that available for use by all. A better analogy is if you're communicating with your neighbor by means of signs you stick in your lawn, so the neighbor can read them, and you get upset that Google reads them as they drive by. It's not reasonable to have any expectation of privacy for these messages. please it only takes a few milliseconds to send data over wifi a lot can be done
so even if it were Changing 5 times a second it could still send data over the web -- Folding parts 4 sale »[FS] or [WTT]Intel LGA771 MB,CellsPhones PS2 DDWRT | |
|
 |  WTF @comcast.net | said by NOYB:So an unlocked door makes it legal to steal my belongings? I don't think so. Bad and old analogy that doesn't fit.
Using the analogy that would mean the house is putting it's unlocked door in front of me anytime I get near it, even if I just want to go down the sidewalk or street without even looking at the house. If I lived next door to that house, why is it putting the unlocked door all over my property weather I want it there or not?
I'm not saying it's right but rather pointing out how that analogy just doesn't fit and never did.
As for privacy, if you don't turn on security in the router, it's your own damn fault if your privacy got leaked or compromised. It's not like Google went out looking for the open routers, the routers found them. | |
|
 |  JohnInSJPremium join:2003-09-22 San Jose, CA Reviews:
·PHONE POWER
·Comcast
| said by NOYB:So an unlocked door makes it legal to steal my belongings? I don't think so. You're tossing all your stuff out your door and onto the public street. I walk by, and one of your sticky socks sticks to the bottom of my shoe.
I don't think that's stealing, no. -- My place : »www.schettino.us | |
|
 |  Simba7I Void Warranties join:2003-03-24 Billings, MT | We have 2 secure APs and 1 unsecure AP at our house.
The 2 secure APs are for our internal network and our unsecure AP is directly to the Internet, but filtered (combination of Dansguardian, Squid, and a set of iptables).
I don't care if people use our internet, as long as they behave themselves and not hog it all. -- Bresnan 15M/1M MyWS[PDC@3.6GHz,4GB RAM,2x1TB HDDs,Win7] WifeWS[A64@2GHz,2GB RAM,120GB HDD,Win7] Router[2xP3@1GHz,512MB RAM,18GB HDD,SMC 8432BTA,2xDigital DE504,Compaq NC3131,Intel Pro/1000MT,IBM Gigabit Ethernet-SX,Allied Telesyn AT-2560FX,Gentoo Linux] | |
|
 1 edit | Where's my tin hat This is such a non-story. If you're stupid enough to use an unsecured wireless network, you should be glad it was Google, and not someone intending something more serious. It's not like Google's cars parked in front of Starbux or something...at least not for that reason! These two Oregon twits are out for nothing but the payout. | |
|
 |  See 6 replies to this post |
|
 JonPremium join:2001-01-20 Lisle, IL | Accidentally? Yeah right. | |
|
 |  See 12 replies to this post |
|
 | | Plaintiffs' Privacy Violated? Quote:'both plaintiffs' privacy has been breached' Can the plaintiffs prove their privacy was violated or they just trying to sue to get some money, or are they doing this so the lawyers get money? | |
|
 |  | | Re: Plaintiffs' Privacy Violated? Its a money grab. I'm not saying they're (Google) perfect, but I doubt they would want to purposely bring a privacy issue into play. -- Listen...do you smell something? | |
|
 |  |  DarkLogixPremium join:2008-10-23 Baytown, TX kudos:3 | Re: Plaintiffs' Privacy Violated? to add to this how do those 2 even know if google got their wifi data? | |
|
 |  |  |  Reviews:
·VOIPo
·Windstream
·BroadVoice
| Re: Plaintiffs' Privacy Violated? said by DarkLogix:to add to this how do those 2 even know if google got their wifi data? Good point, Google should look into their data just to say "hey dumb asses we didn't even get anything from you". -- ASUS M4A79T Deluxe | AMD Phenom II x3 720 BE AM3 w/4 Cores @ 3.41Ghz(OC) | 4Gb DDR3 Memory @ 1600mhz | Sapphire ATI HD4870 1GB 800mhz/1000mhz(OC) | 2x500GB HDD's Raid 0 | Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Build 7600 (RTM) | Windstream DSL 12m (14.9m Sync)/766k | |
|
 |  |  |  |  DarkLogixPremium join:2008-10-23 Baytown, TX kudos:3 | Re: Plaintiffs' Privacy Violated? or even worse hay you were stealling internet then goes and finds the owner of the AP and tells them to secure their ap | |
|
 netwirePremium join:2001-04-27 Shelby, NC kudos:1 | Sheesh It's cases like this that ruin the judicial system. I hope the courts rip the Plaintiffs' a new one. | |
|
 |  DarkLogixPremium join:2008-10-23 Baytown, TX kudos:3 | Re: Sheesh or a new two and three | |
|
 woody7Premium join:2000-10-13 Torrance, CA | hmmmmm.... Can I get in trouble if my ssid says "keepthe_uckout" ?  -- BlooMe | |
|
 |  cchhat01Dr. Zoidberg join:2001-05-01 Elmhurst, NY | Re: hmmmmm.... My SSID says FBI | |
|
 Noah VailSon made my AvatarPremium join:2004-12-10 Lorton, VA kudos:1 Reviews:
·Bright House
·Sprint Mobile Br..
| Google has your data = BAD | Government has your data = GOOD As I've posted before....
Am I more worried about Google having a sample of my AP data, or the NSA having entire private conversations?
Somehow I see the NSA having more ability to casually ruin my life than Google.
How about ordering our privacy threats, by the severity of the danger they present?
NV -- In my perfect religion, a giant hole appears and sucks up all the lousy people. I call it the Crapture. | |
|
 |  Simba7I Void Warranties join:2003-03-24 Billings, MT | Re: Google has your data = BAD | Government has your data = GOOD Heh.. The NSA can get anything they want with a few clicks. If you think any type of data is REALLY secure, think again.
Google, not as much. | |
|
 |  KearnstdElf WizardPremium join:2002-01-22 Mullica Hill, NJ | what i question more is why is it people in the EU openly hate the streetview cars maybe taking their picture yet they seem to accept the police having security cams on every corner. -- [65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
|
 |  | | Despite how interesting people may feel their lives' are, the very large majority of people lead pretty mundane, typical, and uninteresting lives (in the eyes of the government).
So actually I consider it a stronger privacy threat when things center on profit! | |
|
 |  |  Noah VailSon made my AvatarPremium join:2004-12-10 Lorton, VA kudos:1 Reviews:
·Bright House
·Sprint Mobile Br..
| Re: Google has your data = BAD | Government has your data = GOOD said by Bubba Rock:Despite how interesting people may feel their lives' are, the very large majority of people lead pretty mundane, typical, and uninteresting lives (in the eyes of the government). I am certain that personal data collected by the federal government will still be available - to the federal government, a generation from now.
I am also certain that federal data collection, retention and analysis methods will become increasingly efficient.
Unless you say otherwise, I'll assume neither of these predictions seem unlikely to you.
First:Can you name me a corporation that the above would apply to?
Second: In the course of it's duty to serve me, why is it appropriate for the federal government to - without consent - collect any of my personal data?
NV -- In my perfect religion, a giant hole appears and sucks up all the lousy people. I call it the Crapture. | |
|
 |  |  |  | | Re: Google has your data = BAD | Government has your data = GOOD Well a generation from now, maybe, maybe not, but in a generation it will likely be mostly irrelevant anyway.
I'm betting that for-profit data collection, retention, and analysis will remain more advanced and wide spread.
1) I say any corporation that collects data on people will also grow more efficient with their collection, retention, and analysis. Will it remain a generation from now? who knows, but if the company is big enough, probably!
2) Well they are not just serving you, but the whole of the people, and more often than not trying to prevent very bad events from happening. | |
|
 neftv join:2000-10-01 Broomall, PA | Didn't they learn... Didn't they learn the lesson from when they photographed every street. They had to blur out faces, license plates etc. | |
|
 |  jjoshuaPremium join:2001-06-01 Scotch Plains, NJ kudos:1 | Re: Didn't they learn... said by neftv:Didn't they learn the lesson from when they photographed every street. They had to blur out faces, license plates etc. They didn't have to do anything.
Outside of your house, there is no expectation of privacy. This includes your face, your license plate, and any data that you are broadcasting. | |
|
 |  |  Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium join:2002-03-03 USA kudos:4 1 edit | Re: Didn't they learn... said by jjoshua:said by neftv:Didn't they learn the lesson from when they photographed every street. They had to blur out faces, license plates etc. They didn't have to do anything. Outside of your house, there is no expectation of privacy. This includes your face, your license plate, and any data that you are broadcasting. That is only true in the US. In the EU, privacy standards are much higher and they do have higher expectations of privacy from private companies(government itself is a different matter - they pretty much get carte blanche to do anything(see London street cams)).
Edit: PS>> Germany levels broadside at Google: »news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100520/ap_···y_google -- Are you happy with your rep in Washington, DC? | |
|
 |  |  | | said by jjoshua:said by neftv:Didn't they learn the lesson from when they photographed every street. They had to blur out faces, license plates etc. They didn't have to do anything. Outside of your house, there is no expectation of privacy. This includes your face, your license plate, and any data that you are broadcasting. then don't complain when we also have cams on every corner thanks to that exact stupid argument. | |
|
 |  Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium join:2002-03-03 USA kudos:4 | said by neftv:Didn't they learn the lesson from when they photographed every street. They had to blur out faces, license plates etc. No. Google has ALWAYS followed the policy of act first & apologize later when issues of ethics are concerned. It is much easier to ask for forgiveness than ask for permission. If they had to get approval from governments all over the world and also satisfy all the privacy groups BEFORE rolling out some new product or data collection process, they would do nothing. -- Are you happy with your rep in Washington, DC? | |
|
 |  |  FBGuyyippee ki yayPremium join:2005-03-19 | Re: Didn't they learn... bottom line is, they broke no laws. | |
|
 | | Family Ties Which government agency do you think google has ties with? Think about it.
Don't thinks so? Which Chinese intelligence agencies do you think google worked with? | |
|
 superdogI Need A DrinkPremium,MVM join:2001-07-13 Lebanon, PA | all about the money! These people could care less about their privacy, hence the lack of encryption. All these people see is mega $$$$ and deep pockets. The lawyers are loving it and laughing at Googles mistake all the way to the bank!  -- »www.wavecrazy.net
| |
|
 toddbs98 join:2000-07-08 North Little Rock, AR | Why were they sniffing in the first place? If the purpose of the Google vehicles purpose was to take photographs for street view on Google Maps, then why were they sniffing for wi-fi hotspots in the first place? The excuse that we left in old code is kind of weak to start with, but then when you hold onto the data for years and lie about collecting it, makes the excuse of being accidental even weaker. -- Patriots always speak of dying for their country never killing for it. Bertrand Russell
| |
|
 |  r81984Fair and BalancedPremium join:2001-11-14 Katy, TX Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T DSL Service
·row44
| Re: Why were they sniffing in the first place? said by toddbs98: If the purpose of the Google vehicles purpose was to take photographs for street view on Google Maps, then why were they sniffing for wi-fi hotspots in the first place? The excuse that we left in old code is kind of weak to start with, but then when you hold onto the data for years and lie about collecting it, makes the excuse of being accidental even weaker. How about because they want to map access points which is 100% legal to do and would be very useful for google users.
Google did nothing wrong by recording Wifi broadcasted in the public domain. If anyone did not want others to read what they do online they would encrypt their router. Google could only read data that people freely gave away. -- Your behavior is inconsistent with your desire to be treated like everyone else. | |
|
 sam64 join:2006-07-31 Newtown, PA | Money Grabbing Opportunity Smelled by Lawyers & Dumb Idiots This is a money grabbing opportunity smelled by lawyers and the dumb idiots who sued. Karl's analogy is a good one - if you stand naked on your porch and someone sees you, does that become an invasion of your privacy.
With camera devices being ubiquitous on almost everything electronic these days and this rate we will all have to carry release forms lest we inadvertantly snap a picture of some dumb sh*& in the background while taking a picture of our kids.
I hope the courts use some sense and throw this lawsuit out. Additionally, send a message to these dumb assess for wasting the court's time.
Make no mistake - if you leave your wifi network unsecured, someone is going to find it and use it. | |
|
 |  TheMGPremium join:2007-09-04 Canada kudos:1 | Re: Money Grabbing Opportunity Smelled by Lawyers & Dumb Idiots Yup, welcome to the USA, where people sue at every opportunity! | |
|
 Reviews:
·AT&T Southeast
·Clear Wireless
| US Code 2511 Sorry, doesn't apply. »www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/···00-.html
(g) It shall not be unlawful under this chapter or chapter 121 of this title for any person (i) to intercept or access an electronic communication made through an electronic communication system that is configured so that such electronic communication is readily accessible to the general public;
(v) for other users of the same frequency to intercept any radio communication made through a system that utilizes frequencies monitored by individuals engaged in the provision or the use of such system, if such communication is not scrambled or encrypted.
| |
|
 |  jig join:2001-01-05 Hacienda Heights, CA | Re: US Code 2511 i believe that "readily accessible to the general public" has already been interpreted to exclude sniffing packets of other WAP users, regardless of whether encryption is enabled.
certainly, i would make the argument that the software used to sniff such is readily available (i think you can download a knoppix distribution that will boot with something like that just a click away), but.... since it requires a tool that is more than something you'd need to harvest SSID's, it's still a problem.
as far as the other code section, i think there are similar interpretations that exclude WAP hotspots. the providers can monitor, but other users can't intercept other communications. it's funny, one interpretation of that section could be that as long as you and i both have POTS phones, I can intercept your calls. i doubt that's the intent of the section. -- Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam. | |
|
 |  |  Reviews:
·AT&T Southeast
·Clear Wireless
| Re: US Code 2511 Then what does it apply to? Intercepting any radio traffic requires some sort of tool, a receiver..whatever (not up on my radio terminology).
I think the POTS example doesn't apply since it uses private bandwidth whereas wifi goes over unlicensed spectrum. Or maybe not, where's a lawyer when you need one? | |
|
 |  |  |  jig join:2001-01-05 Hacienda Heights, CA | Re: US Code 2511 i think the second section is specifically concerned with cordless phones, walkie talkies, short wave radio, and the like. there's a thin line between those and 8.201x broadcasts, but i think it's recognized in caselaw. -- Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam. | |
|
 | | No sympathy here Google will get no sympathy from me. Driving down the street to make a map has nothing to do with collecting data from routers, secured or unsecured. People are always moving and changing their equipment configurations so I see no plausible use for any information they collected, for any reason. | |
|
 |  See 9 replies to this post |
|
 | | Hmm Next youll have some idiot suing because they have a photo of his car on google maps. It violated his cars privacy hehe | |
|
 |  SeleniaI love DebianPremium join:2006-09-22 Lanesboro, MA kudos:2 | Re: Hmm I have seen my house and my car on Google Earth LOL. That's nothing new. | |
|
 |  |  camaro92Question everythingPremium join:2008-04-05 Westfield, MA | Re: Hmm Same here everyone can if they looked,does that mean we all have a class action lawsuit ,please this country has become so sue happy that it has turned into a huge bandwagon. | |
|
 | | There's that word inadvertant again ... Can someone please tell me how Google or its contractors inadvertently collected this data? The 'news' reports that I've seen or heard call it "inadvertent" without question or explanation.
To me, that's a bit like saying "British Petroleum was inadvertently drilling for oil in the Gulf of Mexico when the drilling caused a disaster to happen". | |
|
 |
|