Man Charged With Stealing Wi-Fi Signal

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor..._wi_fi_theft_1

Interesting. Internet should be free anyway

I can just hear it now, "You used my bandwidth to check your E-mail, you owe $0.43 and a hug!"

At one point in time our neighborhood had almost 100% coverage of wireless. People have moved and WAPs have gone but it was pretty nice, especially since not everyone had the same ISP, so when mine would go down it was pretty easy to still get E-mail

Edit: You know, this really pisses me off now that I think about it a bit more. Smith didn't ever admit to doing anything WRONG with the guy's wireless, and I highly doubt that he can prove that Smith was trafficing kiddy porn or stealing credit card numbers...or even sending death threats. My guess is he was probably just (at most) checking E-mail, reading up on some news, and then would move on. I'm not an advocate for misuse, but if this Dick guy...er, I mean Richard, was so truely worried about his wireless he would've either locked it down himself, or hired someone to come in and do it.

You don't hear the radio stations complaining when someone from out of state comes into town and listens to their broadcast do you? Unless Smith was doing something worthy of a crime the case better be thrown out or we'll have people calling the police everytime someone pulls over to readjust their GPS on the laptop.

Ignorance =/= the right to sue.

People should take the time to encrypt their wireless networks to enable access to those trusted by MAC address, and nobody else.

Having their bandwidth stolen serves them right, be it a crime or not.

Do you charge money for your hosting?

I wouldn't say that exactly, I'd just say it's a lesson - learned the hard way. Maybe now they'll actually lock their AP down.

No, of course not

But seriously, who would look out their window, see a guy with a laptop in his car, then ring the police?

John, your reply struck me as a little....unusual. Lets take the same type of situation, and place it in a different scenario.

You and your girlfriend decide to have sex (replacement for wireless network)

You have the necessary equipment (sexual organs)

Yet you don't use protection or contraceptives (replacement for not locking the AP)

9 months later you're a daddy. Is it not your fault?

I hope I made where I was coming from a little clearer

Thanks

I think you misunderstood me Anthony.

True point,

However you cannot compare the two I think. Unwanted child to unwanted bandwidth usage?

That must be one expensive Internet. You connect to the Internet, load Hotmail/Gmail, waste at most 500KB.
If 10GB is the ISP's download limit, and $25/mo is the price, you would owe $0.00004.



PS: Internet can't be free as it costs money to SOMEONE. It doesn't matter the amount you steal - $0.01 or $1,000,000. Its a theft and should be prosecuted.

Artashes,

Obviously my free internet comment has gone down the wrong with everyone. It was just a joke, though I'm sure in the very far future it will become free.

How can you prove he was stealing it? Now, if the AP was in fact encrypted, filtered, etc... and the guy STILL got on and was using the Internet, then yes. I'd say he has a case - but if the AP was wide open, no encryption/filtering then how can you prove that what he did was wrong?

It's the same thing as listening to the radio in your car with 2 other people. Those 2 other people in the car didn't buy the radio, they don't pay for the car maintenance, and they most likely didn't pitch in for gas (if they're anyone I know ) so would they be stealing my radio listening time if one of them put in a CD? Depends on what CD. Would I be able to sue them for it? Probably. Would I win? No.

/rant.

Edit: Oh, and the $0.43 thing. That's to help cover costs of buying the WAP

John, radio intentionally gets a license to broadcast to mass audience.
I don't think intention of a private consumer is the same. Not to mention that the TOS of any ISP probably restrict sharing.

Well then the ISP needs to be pressing the charges, not the owner of the WAP. And the ISP should then also press charges against the owner of the WAP for not locking said AP down. I just can't understand how this Richard guy has a viable case. Does StarBucks get a license for their free WiFi? What about Panera and Barnes & Noble? They all have free WiFi...and the hotels?

I'd really like to see the outcome of this trial.