Active Topics
-
Maemo repository (9)
to Community by nokiafemboy - 7 hrs, 21 mins ago -
Error after installing Leste on sdcard (18)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by Maemish - 22 hrs, 46 mins ago -
Maemo 20th Anniversary (4)
to Brainstorm by teroyk - 2 days, 17 hrs ago -
Nokia Booklet 3G (RX-75) Drivers (64)
to Alternatives by teroyk - 2 days, 18 hrs ago -
Porting apps to Leste (46)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by teroyk - 4 days, 21 hrs ago - more...
 |
|
2008-04-30
, 20:14
|
|
Posts: 868 |
Thanked: 474 times |
Joined on Oct 2007
@ Capital District, NY, USA
|
#12
|
it depends on the state. The vast majority of states require explicit authorization to use "free" wifi.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_Piggybacking
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_Piggybacking
 |
|
2008-04-30
, 20:20
|
|
Posts: 4,930 |
Thanked: 2,272 times |
Joined on Oct 2007
|
#13
|
Originally Posted by geneven
Actually, it is like that; if your neighbor's sheep jumps into your yard, and you butcher it, you'll be in trouble. Try it sometime.
I think that neither you nor I understand legal reasoning that well. I think the key, however, is that "common-sense" reasoning doesn't apply to media that were unimagined when common sense evolved. Wireless is not like sheep jumping over the fence into your yard.
|
|
2008-04-30
, 20:21
|
|
Posts: 481 |
Thanked: 190 times |
Joined on Feb 2006
@ Salem, OR
|
#14
|
Originally Posted by brontide
when you connect to an open wifi, your laptop (or whatever) ask for permission, the router will give the permission and hands you a name tag, the ip (no trickery or hacking involved). It is not a passive process, like, say, entering an unlocked home, in which the house is passively exploited.
it depends on the state. The vast majority of states require explicit authorization to use "free" wifi.
 |
|
2008-04-30
, 21:51
|
|
Posts: 566 |
Thanked: 145 times |
Joined on Feb 2008
@ Tallahassee, FL
|
#15
|
Originally Posted by ioan
umm... yes it is. The act of you entering an unlocked home and treating it as your own is construed (by the law) exactly the same is you using your laptop to enter their unlocked wifi internet access and treating it as your own. when you connect to an open wifi, your laptop (or whatever) ask for permission, the router will give the permission and hands you a name tag, the ip (no trickery or hacking involved). It is not a passive process, like, say, entering an unlocked home, in which the house is passively exploited.
...and, it doesn't matter if they're "beaming it into your back yard" or not. ...and, if they were "beaming it into your back yard", you wouldn't need to spend money on a high-gain directional wifi antenna so that you could snipe their wifi access from afar, either.
 |
|
2008-04-30
, 22:05
|
|
Posts: 3,220 |
Thanked: 326 times |
Joined on Oct 2005
@ "Almost there!" (Monte Christo, Count of)
|
#16
|
Originally Posted by GeneralAntilles
It's actually not ridiculous nor irrelevant. Especially as it is so relatively easy for his neighbour to keep his "digital water" on his side of the fence.
Ridiculous and irrelevant argument.
Meaning: It's rather easy to restrict access to a WiFi cloud, as simple as setting MAC addresses. I'm not arguing that those measures are secure (they're far from it), but at least implementing one or more would show intent to protect one's own WiFi cloud.
The legislation that now applies is effectively one to protect the terminally stupid and/or unwilling to learn. This is not a good thing, if only because it will have a negative effect on the average intelligence of our species.
A far better policy would be to severely punish those that infringe upon secured wireless networks -- however flawed that security might be -- and consider all unsecured networks open for public access.
But noooo! that would mean people would have to start using their brains. Can't have that, can we? Next thing we know, they start voting for Ron Paul...
__________________
Watch out Nokia, Pandora's box has opened (sorta)...
I do love explaining cryptic sigs, but for the impatient: http://www.openpandora.org/
Watch out Nokia, Pandora's box has opened (sorta)...
I do love explaining cryptic sigs, but for the impatient: http://www.openpandora.org/
|
|
2008-04-30
, 22:45
|
|
Posts: 868 |
Thanked: 474 times |
Joined on Oct 2007
@ Capital District, NY, USA
|
#18
|
Originally Posted by ioan
Have fun explaining that to the judge if your state has not already adopted liberal laws on the subject.
when you connect to an open wifi, your laptop (or whatever) ask for permission, the router will give the permission and hands you a name tag, the ip (no trickery or hacking involved). It is not a passive process, like, say, entering an unlocked home, in which the house is passively exploited.
EDIT: I agree with your point, but to believe that your opinion holds weight with a court in a state where they have not decriminalized this kind of access then you are delusional.
|
|
2008-05-01
, 02:09
|
|
Posts: 5,795 |
Thanked: 3,151 times |
Joined on Feb 2007
@ Agoura Hills Calif
|
#19
|
In my statement, I was referring to US law as interpreted by courts. As I already said in this thread, Benson, I don't understand the legal principles very well. Since you do, how about you explain what the laws are and in which states they apply?
Oh, and on the other subject, the "similarity" of wireless and sheep jumping over a wall into your yard. They are NOT similar. You can forbid your neighbor from letting sheep trespass on your yard, but try forbidding wireless communications to cross your property.
Last edited by geneven; 2008-05-01 at 02:12.
Oh, and on the other subject, the "similarity" of wireless and sheep jumping over a wall into your yard. They are NOT similar. You can forbid your neighbor from letting sheep trespass on your yard, but try forbidding wireless communications to cross your property.
Last edited by geneven; 2008-05-01 at 02:12.
|
|
2008-05-01
, 03:45
|
|
Posts: 1,950 |
Thanked: 1,174 times |
Joined on Jan 2008
@ Seattle, USA
|
#20
|
Originally Posted by ioan
ioan, what you purchased is fine for your home computer. But, don't forget, your Nokia Internet Tablet is mobile, and for that, here's what you really need!
http://www.i-hacked.com/index.php?op...=261&Itemid=42
today I'm waiting for fedex to deliver my antenna, I have everything else.
-ioan
__________________
.
. .
Help Save This Forum for N8x0/Diablo Users! Register and Vote for Solution #1 on this Brainstorm. (The Solution will let you see New Posts with any threads you choose -- like the N900 and Maemo5/Fremantle threads -- filtered out.) (To understand the Solution better, see these posts #17, #18, and #19.)
.
. .
Help Save This Forum for N8x0/Diablo Users! Register and Vote for Solution #1 on this Brainstorm. (The Solution will let you see New Posts with any threads you choose -- like the N900 and Maemo5/Fremantle threads -- filtered out.) (To understand the Solution better, see these posts #17, #18, and #19.)
Not to be any more of a jerk than necessary, but such statements really ought to be accompanied by at least a mention of what nation, preferably of what court (or whatever) has regarded it so, and ideally a citation of the precedent/decision under discussion.
In the US, I'm not aware of any cases involving a home network deliberately left open. The most likely issue would be a DCMA case against the network owner.