Slashdot Mirror
Busted For Using Library Wi-Fi Outside The Library
sevej writes "Keith Shaw, in his weekly column "Wireless Computing Devices" (Network World Fusion), reported on a recent entry in AKMA's Random Thoughts where AKMA was using a public WiFi network outside of a library. A policeman approached him and asked that he only access the Internet from within the Library and hinted that Federal Laws against "signal theft" were applicable. Oh, and btw, we're not talking about a person that looked like your stereotypical 'hacker'; AKMA is an ordained priest."
I wonder how the police officee knew the priest was using wi-fi? A wi-fi sniffer or something like this?
The signal itself was not stolen, it was the receiver's bandwidth.
Now, had they secured their Airport, they would not had it vampirized.
And I am not sure the inside/outside concept applies to a radio signal...
Trolling using another account since 2005.
He should have replied that since it was a public access point that he was in his rights to use it in a public area (namely outside the library)
"A policeman approached him and asked that he only access the Internet from within the Library"
What if the guy wasn't using the Internet but was editing his site and was looking at the preview? (this was not the case but what if)
Have you metaroderated recently?
Oh, and btw, we're not talking about a person that looked like your stereotypical 'hacker'; AKMA is an ordained priest.
What are you advocating here exactly? That police officers are more justified to harrass some because of their look? Or that the law is less applicable to some people because of their job? With ignorant, prejudicial comments like this who needs rights eh? Let's just roundup all those who look like they may cause trouble and be done with it...
Looks, job, race, gender, etc should have nothing to do with the law and law enforcement. Laws and rights apply to everyone equally.
IIRC there have been many lawsuits upheld on the basis of if the signal enters your property it's public domain. Otherwise people could say that company was liable to pay them to access their airspace and such. That's why decoders were technically legal for so long.
Now the DMCA makes it illegal to decode those signals.
Now I dont understand why some landowner who owns huge tracts have not sued the satilite broadcasters for using their airspace as a transmission medium again and ask for royalties and why cities have not charged tarriffs since they're essentially getting a free ride over the airwaves. If it was fiber optics buried in the ground they'd pay.
I agree. Radio signals, light, are things you use but not consume (for lack of a better word, excuse my english). I know that over here in Holland there's indeed a law for this. If something is published in the ether, everyone able to receive it is allowed to do so.
However, if you use bandwidth you're not simply using it as you would use a radio signal. Your intrusion (because that's what it is) is causing other users' bandwidth to decrease. Not only that, but you're active on a network that you shouldn't have access to, which could be considered illegal. I'm not familiar with US laws.
Seriously...where was this at? I read his site and didn't see where he's from.
I smell something very fishy here BTW. He showed the cop the second time that he wasn't connecting to anywhere and yet the cop told him to move along. Move along? He was on a bench on public land just looking at his computer! The cop had no right to tell him to move along!
Two sides to every story I suppose, but would be interesting to call the police station and get their take on it...if only I knew where this was all taking place.
Also, where is this story reported from? The submitter of the story said "Keith Shaw, in his weekly column" yet the link just goes to an index where I can't find anything on AKMA...nor does it even show up on a search of the site!
"Music is everybody's possession. It's only publishers who think that people own it." - John Lennon.
Here is the law .Refer (a)(2)(C)
fifteen jugglers, five believers
Other than physical notice like signs or TOS agreements, is there a current way to advertise "this is a public WiFi network" over the network itself? Obviously if the library wanted they could post a sign outside that said the network was public access. But what if you want to run a public spot from your house? or apartment? A sign isn't going to be seen by everyone.
If there is no current convention, maybe it could be done by, say, sending a periodic broadcast packet on a specific port with a text message. "This network is public access" or something. Maybe there needs to be an RFC?
I hold it, that a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing. -- Thomas Jefferson
I read a story about a similar issue (just several decades ago), where someone used someone elses electric power (i.e. ran two wires from his power line). The argument back then was that nothing was stolen because all the electrons taken away were promptly returned.
As a result the law was updated so that this particular behavior became illegal (something most of us would agree with). In this case the definition of theft had to be updated. The law did not mandate that all power line are to be buried under 10 feet thick concrete (to make them secure).
Now we have many folks hooking up wLAN access points who don't know how to properly configure them, essentally leaving them open. I've read numerous stories about war driving/flying/biking/sailig/whatever here on slashdot.
So most commons (who don't know how to encrypt wLAN but want an access point) will be very happy about this new definition of theft. This may lead to some funny results (as TFA helps to point out) but most of us will understand what the point of this law is and find it agreeable.
Result: expect this law to remain and to be extended to most places. In some cases courts will have to decide whether a particular case is theft or not.
the only incentive beyond pure altruism I can see for becoming a cop is the power trip.
My brother is a deputy in a small town, because he likes to drive fast and carry guns. Scary.
The library was closed and the signal was still available. I would say that implies that they expect the access to be used outside library hours, and therefore outside of the library building.
I'm guessing that wasn't on their radar screen...
My brother in law is a civil engineer. His pet peeve is that somebody will get hurt when a porch railing collapse, and the local authorities will amend the building code to require that porch railings be built stronger. Except that the problem was that the railing didn't meet code to begin with. Then carpenters will scratch their heads and ask him whether a railing they just built is strong enough.
His solution is the "butt test". Take the biggest guy you have on site. Stand next to him a couple feet away from the rail, and fall backwards so your butts land on the rail at the same time. If this doesn't make you nervous, then the railing is strong enough.
This situation is pretty much analagous to a lot of cyberlaws. They're supposed to "clarify" things but all they do is create a bunch of new restrictions everyone has to learn to steer their way around. It all gets muddled up in the average person (or cop's head) to the point where they are n't sure what is legal or not. It probably never makes sense to propose a law to "clarify" anything, at least until the courts have had a crack at the situation. Prosecutors are pretty creative at finding ways to do this, and if the courts get it wrong, then it's time for a new law. Programs can be created to educate police and prosecutors on strategies for using existing laws. But that would (a) take longer, (b) appear to be more expensive and (c) doesn't sound as good. It sounds better to say "I wrote a law to stop kiddie porn over the Internet", than "I sponsored a program to teach law enforcement how to use the law against people trafficking in kiddie porn on the Internet." Create an educational program points out the (true) fact that you can't do anything directly about kiddie porn, you're one step removed from the actual action.
I should point out reason (d), though: new laws are a chance to change the way the law works to favor one party or another.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Cellphones work on the assumption that the radio frequencies used are to have the same operative security from snooping as wireline communications. This is one of the reasons that radio scanners have the cellphone frequencies blocked out. Computer networking relies on wireline transport. Wi-Fi transport is relatively new. Even though the signal passes through the walls and outside, if the operational policy of the library (run by the city or county), who runs and maintains the AP, states that you have to be within the physical building to use the services, they are within their right to ask the local gendarme to ask the errant user to quit. Since they would have the ability to control who plugs in a ethernet cable into a public router, the same idea here should apply here to the wireless side. AFAIK, the FCC has not transported the cellular telephone privacy idea to Wi-Fi. It would be interesting to see if some deep-pockets spread some dead-president lubricant on the FCC to enact the philosophy or worse yet, having Wi-Fi ports be licensed with the usual outrageous wallet tapping. If those thieves do that, then I drop my Part 15 operation and switch over to Part 97 operation using VPN.
I gotta go with the cop on this one. Ya, the wi-fi leeching is probably not illegal, but it is using a free public service in a way that was not intended.
But the idea of a priest hanging around a parking lot with all those kids coming and going...
Seriously though, he wasn't "busted". He has not been whisked away by a black van filled with ski-masked villians to a classified prison. He wasn't even arrested. Hell, he didn't get a freaking parking ticket. A lone cop allegedly asked him to stop doing something which may or may not have been illegal, perhaps as an excuse just to engage him in conversation and make sure he was on the up-and-up.
Someone re-file this under "Whining About Trivial Annoyances", and leave YRO for the occasional legitimate problem.
If i put an old coach at the curb and place a $40 sign on it and someone walks off with it; it's not really stealling because in some location there is a finders law stating that property not properly secured or on public grounds without an owener than said property rights is left to the finder aka finders' rights.
Doesn't this state it is basically the job of the network to provide the security?
If you don't want me intercepting your signals, keep them off me.
What probable cause did the officer have to do this? I can't see any.
Me, either. AKMA should drop the local police comissioner a note, and ask for an explanation.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
I'm recently retired as an IT director for a public library. Two years ago I put WiFi in place at nine branches and INTENTIONALLY placed hubs near windows facing parking lots to allow WiFi access outside the buildings and outside normal open hours. We don't guarantee outide (or inside) 100% coverage. (Dooesn't work? Move to another chair!), but the idea is to provide free public access.
How about a moderation of -1 pedantic.