Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Man Charged With Stealing Wi-Fi Signal
- Thread starter atari1356
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
ebuc said:
Sounds like you're a kind soul but many in the world are unkind. What if someone uses your signal to do something illegal? What if someone plays a joke and sends a bomb threat to www.fbi.gov
Password protect your signal my friend. It's easy to do so why take chances?
They should give him at least 10 years!! 
.
.
.
bah! Who cares! Everyone should take care of his own setup! if it's open then just don't complain!!
.
.
.
bah! Who cares! Everyone should take care of his own setup! if it's open then just don't complain!!
Warning, simple mind at work here.
For those who find what was done in this case acceptable, I wonder if you'd feel comfortable asking the network owner for permission before you connected. If not, then maybe you should question if this is really OK.
For those who find what was done in this case acceptable, I wonder if you'd feel comfortable asking the network owner for permission before you connected. If not, then maybe you should question if this is really OK.
Is this a tresspass like cutting through someone's front yard? Or is it walking through their house?
What if the homeowner paid for the megabyte? They do in some places?
Honestly I don't mind sharing my bandwidth but I have it locked down because I worry about liability if someone uses it unauthorized. Adelphia would be right to shut me down if there were a spambot spooging through my router. What if the cops come knocking on my door because my neighbor is scamming my bandwidth to run a kiddie porn website. I would spend 6 months in a federal PMITA prison before it was all straightened out.
What if the homeowner paid for the megabyte? They do in some places?
Honestly I don't mind sharing my bandwidth but I have it locked down because I worry about liability if someone uses it unauthorized. Adelphia would be right to shut me down if there were a spambot spooging through my router. What if the cops come knocking on my door because my neighbor is scamming my bandwidth to run a kiddie porn website. I would spend 6 months in a federal PMITA prison before it was all straightened out.
L
Lau
Guest
How can this be illegal
Many interesting points and opinions here. But I don't think you can say this is an illegal activity. An unlocked door is not a good analogy here, nor is the idea that the accused is taking something away from the wifi owner.
I can put an old sofa out on the edge of the street and everyone understands that they are welcome to take it. Can I then accuse them of stealing? Just because I didn't know enough to put it somewhere more secure? Or, better yet, can I call the police because someone is sitting on it? What if I'm renting the couch? Could I then claim that I'm not able to use it when I want, because someone else keeps sitting on it?
Going back to wifi, it seems simple to me (but maybe I'm too simple). The owner has a transmitter that is broadcasting into the airwaves AND the wifi base station is purposely broadcasting it's existence by broadcasting its name AND it is neither password protected or data encrypted.
Now, if the accused repeatedly shows up after the wifi owner tells the guy to go away, that's a different case. If the accused is actually accessing the wifi owners computers, that's also a different case. If the accused is spamming or doing anything else that is purposely putting the wifi owner at risk, again, that's a different case.
Many interesting points and opinions here. But I don't think you can say this is an illegal activity. An unlocked door is not a good analogy here, nor is the idea that the accused is taking something away from the wifi owner.
I can put an old sofa out on the edge of the street and everyone understands that they are welcome to take it. Can I then accuse them of stealing? Just because I didn't know enough to put it somewhere more secure? Or, better yet, can I call the police because someone is sitting on it? What if I'm renting the couch? Could I then claim that I'm not able to use it when I want, because someone else keeps sitting on it?
Going back to wifi, it seems simple to me (but maybe I'm too simple). The owner has a transmitter that is broadcasting into the airwaves AND the wifi base station is purposely broadcasting it's existence by broadcasting its name AND it is neither password protected or data encrypted.
Now, if the accused repeatedly shows up after the wifi owner tells the guy to go away, that's a different case. If the accused is actually accessing the wifi owners computers, that's also a different case. If the accused is spamming or doing anything else that is purposely putting the wifi owner at risk, again, that's a different case.
i think it is fairly simple:
Who is providing the product or service? The ISP.
The ISP then legally owns that product and can charge what they think is fair market value for that product.
In order to use that product or signal the internet "user" needs to pay or enter into a financial agreement with the "provider" to use his product or services.
If a "user" is sitting outside someones house and is using the signal unbeknownst to the homeowner and the provider, he is using their product without their knowledge and has not paid for that product.
Now some cities like La Jolla in San Diego, CA. have a wireless network in certain areas that anyone is allowed to use free of charge because it attracts poeple and business to the area but it is their choice to provide that as a service and I am sure they paid a lot to provide it.
Bottom Line: Unauthorized use of someones service is not legal, whether it is morally correct and that internet signal should be free to everyone is another issue entirely.
Who is providing the product or service? The ISP.
The ISP then legally owns that product and can charge what they think is fair market value for that product.
In order to use that product or signal the internet "user" needs to pay or enter into a financial agreement with the "provider" to use his product or services.
If a "user" is sitting outside someones house and is using the signal unbeknownst to the homeowner and the provider, he is using their product without their knowledge and has not paid for that product.
Now some cities like La Jolla in San Diego, CA. have a wireless network in certain areas that anyone is allowed to use free of charge because it attracts poeple and business to the area but it is their choice to provide that as a service and I am sure they paid a lot to provide it.
Bottom Line: Unauthorized use of someones service is not legal, whether it is morally correct and that internet signal should be free to everyone is another issue entirely.
I think that there is a fine line here, as it does not say exactly what the person was doing with the Wi-Fi access. If the guy was just browsing the shared files, then he should not be punished by the legal system. On any network, any shared files should be expected to be viewed. Anything that the owner doesnt want shared should be kept private.
However, if the guy were using his access to the network to gain access to the internet, he should be charged and punished as the law states for stealing other utilities (water, power, cable, whatever else). Essentially, that's what he would be doing is stealing the internet utility.
The real gray area comes because information is broadcast over the airwaves. If the guy had a 500' Cat5 cable running from the base station to the SUV, this would be no problem whatsoever.
On a side note, it would be freaking halarious if they had a printer shared over the network and the guy started printing stuff to it.
"I'm watching you..."
"I know what you've been looking at..."
"All your base are belong to us."
HA!
However, if the guy were using his access to the network to gain access to the internet, he should be charged and punished as the law states for stealing other utilities (water, power, cable, whatever else). Essentially, that's what he would be doing is stealing the internet utility.
The real gray area comes because information is broadcast over the airwaves. If the guy had a 500' Cat5 cable running from the base station to the SUV, this would be no problem whatsoever.
On a side note, it would be freaking halarious if they had a printer shared over the network and the guy started printing stuff to it.
"I'm watching you..."
"I know what you've been looking at..."
"All your base are belong to us."
HA!
Seems to me the only real loser in a case like this is going to be the service provider, not the consumer who is leaving their network wide open for all to use (assuming I'm paying a monthly fee regardless of usage). I'm broadcasting a signal to my neighbors that they would otherwise have to purchase from a service provider. Am I stealing, or at least denying revenue, from my ISP by broadcasting something for free that they would charge for?
If I don't want to share my access, I can encrypt my network. OTOH, the ISP has no means of preventing me from giving away their service for free. For that matter, what's to prevent me from getting paid $10 from each of my neighbors for providing internet access to them? Cheaper for them,, subsidizes my costs. That sure smells illlegal to me.
If I don't want to share my access, I can encrypt my network. OTOH, the ISP has no means of preventing me from giving away their service for free. For that matter, what's to prevent me from getting paid $10 from each of my neighbors for providing internet access to them? Cheaper for them,, subsidizes my costs. That sure smells illlegal to me.
powermac666 said:
i agree with this. Likely the ISP has it in the agreement that the service won't be shared. If anything the ISP could sue for breach of agreement.
Seriously, in this day an age of internet theft and malicious activity you have no business having a wifi network unless you know how to secure it.
dswoodley said:
If the agreement we sign with our ISP does not already state it is illegal to share access, for profit or not, it will soon. From the perspective of the service provider, how is this really any different that running my cable, or my landline phone, to my neighbor's house for him to leech?
dswoodley said:
This was my point (not "regurgitating" the original argument) that the ISP provides a service, and that everybody has to pay to use that service. Sharing it or providing it for free to someone is illegal, that why I said it seems fairly straightforward or "simple" to me. If you are using something that you didn't and would normally have to pay for it is illegal.
rickvanr said:
Agreed. The airwaves are free-at least in the US. If he broke into it, that's one thing. If it was being broadcast unsecured, he should walk as there was no loss to the person with the network.
leekohler said:
I agree. The person with the network did nothing illegal, nor did the person leeching, assuming the network was unsecured and his usage was innocent of illegal activity.
The only potential loser here is the ISP. I smell regulatory change in the wind....
MacNut said:
It's all in the wording of the license agreement between the city and the ISP. Somehow I doubt the language is the same. I also doubt the city pays $29.95 a month for the service.
powermac666 said:
Lets say my neighbor doesnt have cable TV or satellite. If I invite him over to watch something on cable TV, can the cable company then sue me for denying revenue to them? No, they can't. If I rent a movie at Blockbuster and me and 5 of my buddies watch it, Blockbuster is making less than if all 6 of us rented our own copy, but they can't claim that we're denying revenue to them.
Or take Sirius satellite radio which I have in my car for example. If I'm sitting at a stoplight with the windows open and music blasting, and the guy in the car next to me hears it, I'm not breaking the law by letting someone who isn't subscribed listen to it, and they're not breaking the law by listening. And in turn, I shouldn't be pissed because I'm paying 13 bucks a month for the service and some stranger who isn't paying anything is listening. If I don't want anyone else to listen, I roll up my window. The guy's Wifi signal is no different. He's paying for a service that in turn is out in the open for anyone nearby to use. If he doesn't want anyone else to use it, then enable WEP.
powermac666 said:
How in the world do you regulate the airwaves? Will it be like England where they drive around in little vans to make sure you're not watching TV? (they still do that, right?)
MacNut said:
No because Starbucks has paid for the connection and service and I am sure that the ISP is aware of Starbucks intent to share the service. A coffee business is not a heavy computing environment like say a design firm, so when Starbucks applys for an internet license the ISP must be aware that they are going to share the service and provide it to attract customers. They may even have a separate financial agreement in place to account for it. Everybody knows that Starbucks supplys wireless internet to customers the ISP included.
leekohler said:
Personally, I don't think this should be regulated, but you know how communications companies get when they think someone is costing them revenue.
Is there a way for a cable or DSL provider to look at your network to determine if it secured or not? I mean by acccessing your IP remotely, not by van (although....
). If an ISP can require your network to be secured, or somehow limit the number of users able to log onto it, we might get there.
I think part of the problem at the moment is you have no idea whether people intend to share their connection or not. There are so many people who set up a wifi router and don't do anything to secure it because they're not aware of it or because they can't make it work. I set up a Belkin router last week and there's no mention of security in the Quick Start Guide - you have to drill to page 43 of the manual before it mentions it might be a good idea!
As people become more wifi-savvy, hopefully they'll learn to hide SSIDs and password networks they don't want to share. Those who are happy to share can change their network name to something that has 'Welcome to use' in the title or something and things will be clearer.
At the moment, if I'm out and about, open up my PB and find an open network, I'll probably check my mail and a couple of sites - nothing illegal, nothing taking up huge amounts of bandwidth. I wouldn't dream of poking around in shared files or printing (although I know someone prints a polite message to the printer warning the person that their network is open) And I wouldn't try to break into a network that was broadcasting its SSID. I also wouldn't think of it as a long-term arrangement!
As people become more wifi-savvy, hopefully they'll learn to hide SSIDs and password networks they don't want to share. Those who are happy to share can change their network name to something that has 'Welcome to use' in the title or something and things will be clearer.
At the moment, if I'm out and about, open up my PB and find an open network, I'll probably check my mail and a couple of sites - nothing illegal, nothing taking up huge amounts of bandwidth. I wouldn't dream of poking around in shared files or printing (although I know someone prints a polite message to the printer warning the person that their network is open)
And I wouldn't try to break into a network that was broadcasting its SSID. I also wouldn't think of it as a long-term arrangement!