Re: [MLUG] locate cantenna | grep hella_legal

["Christian M. Cepel" <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

Rick Buford wrote:

> Matthew Schmidt wrote:
>
>> hi folks,
>>
>> thanks for all the input! i started looking into the issues you
>> brought up. it is a very grey, murky area. does connecting to an open
>> AP constitute theft? well, it would appear that it all depends on one
>> thing--intent. did the person who owns the open AP /intend/ for others
>> to access it? did the person who connected to that open AP /intend/ an
>> illegal act?
>>
>> what about the issue of open wifi neighborhood and city networks? the
>> intent of the providers is to, well, provide bandwidth--and for free.
>> so is it illegal for me to connect to that network if I am unaware
>> what the provider's intent is?
>>
>> the points about sharing your bandwidth with your neighbor are well
>> received. but what if that is the intent of the people who own the APs
>> I'm connecting to? are they not also my neighbor?
>>
>> this issue really boils down to one thing IMO: cizzash. flow. dollas.
>> who's making money off my bandwidth requirements if i'm connecting to
>> someone else's access point? Mediacom would be out $45 bucks, give or
>> take, for each person who does this. so expect some hella legislation
>> in the future that will definitely infringe on this "wild west" of
>> wifi that we're currently enjoying.
>>
>> yes, I said hella again ;)
>>
> But, if a shopkeeper was throwing name brand clothes in piles outside 
> their shop and then leaving for the evening, were they throwing them 
> away or trying to sell them? If a provider throws a WIFI signal out in 
> the public arena and makes no attempt to secure it, are they selling 
> it or giving it away?

Exactly... burden is on you to find out before acting or, you can say 
high to your new cellmate Bubba who thinks 'you gotta purdy mouth.'

> That said, bypassing security = theft, plain and simple. But, if 
> they're too stupid to setup WEP or upstream security on their signal, 
> then they're too stupid to reasonably run a business in the first 
> place. The market --should-- push them out.

Yes!!!!! you finally did it.  You clearly made the argument that your 
wrong actions are justified because of something they've done.  This 
fully is in line with the 'my actions are justified because of their 
actions' argument that people have used when stealing from RIAA.  The 
argument here is that RIAA _deserves_ any negative effects from your 
action because they brought it on themselves.

Same goes for software theft and the evil Microsoft, or Autodesk, or 
Adobe, or Discrete (3dStudioMax (right?)), etc.

Can you as an adult really stand there with a straight face and say that 
without knowing that you look like a moron?

You're trying to justify what you WANT.   That's no justification at all.

-- 

|Christian Marcus Cepel           | And the wrens have returned &
EMAIL:PROTECTED icq:12384980 | are nesting; In the hollow of
371 Crown Point, Columbia, MO    | that oak where his heart once
65203-2202 573.999.2370          | had been; And he lifts up his
Computer Support Specialist, Sr. | arms in a blessing; For being
University of Missouri-Columbia  | born again. --Rich Mullins|

_______________________________________________
members mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/members