New
#1
Kari, that makes sense. It is ultimately the owners responsibility to protect their wireless network. A Guy
At last the legislators are doing something right!
-
-
-
New #3
Interesting concept. So if the Wi-Fi network is not protected, anyone has a right to use my internet service. I guess if I leave my house unlocked then it is open for anyone to use.
I don't use a Wi-Fi at home, went with direct wiring and power line adapters, and I don't leave my house unlocked either.
Jim
-
New #4
Jim... to be fair. If you leave your house unlocked and something gets stolen then your insurance won't pay out. i guess it's the same principle.
Personally I welcome this move. Especially the bit about not being liable if someone else uses your wireless for illegal purposes.
-
New #5
-
New #6
Phone Man, I understand your point, but still I think it's a right decision.
Your example, not locking your door, is a very good one. If you don't lock your house door, or your car door, and something will be stolen from inside your house or car, or if you leave the keys in the ignition and someone just takes your car, insurance company has a valid, legal right not to compensate.
It's your responsibility to lock after you. I like this idea, it might help people to remember to "lock the door", secure their networks.
-
New #7
In an effort to support state wide wireless in New Hampshire its totally legal to use an unsecured wireless connection. They are do thing in an effort to get a wi-fi blanket around the state that anyone can access when needed.
I ran a second router with open access at slower speeds that what my service was but enough that anyone in the city block that could pick it up could use it for light surfing. Downtown Manchester New Hampshire has a section of its main road Elm St covered in free wireless. The City hall area has free access for 45 minute time blocks also.
-
New #8
That's good Kari, too much legislation is not. If you don't want anyone to use it, use a password.
@macgyver2
That's a nice idea, and nice of you to get involved.
-
New #9
While I don't disagree with your first point, I would like to point out that leaving your house unlocked is quite different from leaving your wireless unprotected in that, in the first instance, you're not advertising that fact. IF you put a big sign over your door that said "Door unlocked, come on in!", I think you would have a very hard time getting any insurance company to compensate you when your stuff got stolen.However, if i leave my house unlocked, its still a crime to go in and steal from me. If I leave my Wi-Fi unprotected then it would no longer be a crime to steal my internet service.
Jim
With Win7, which now makes it easier to find accessible wireless networks, all you have to do is look at the popup box. Any of the networks that have the "shield" on them are unprotected. I think the lawyer defending anyone charged with "stealing" from your network could make an argument that you were advertising the availability of your network to the public.
BTW, and this is NOT intended as flame bait, I personally do NOT agree with the legislation. IMHO, theft is theft -- whether you make it easy or hard to steal from you should make no difference. But ... that's just my opinion.
At last the legislators are doing something right!
Posted: 12 Jun 2010
In my native Finland, the Parliament is preparing to change legislation so that unauthorized use of unprotected WiFi would no longer be punishable, the sole argument being that it is so easy to protect a WiFi network, those not protecting can basically blame themselves.
Original article (In Finnish): Suojaamattoman wlanin käyttö halutaan laillistaa - Uutiset - MikroPC
An online translation of said article:
Ministry of Justice has begun to prepare an amendment to the legislation, after which the unauthorized use of unprotected WiFi network should no longer be punishable.
According to statements gathered by the Ministry, punishment is no longer supported by authorities and public.
The Ministry asked opinions from different parties and authorities. The majority of them do not agree with the sentence, because unauthorized use can easily be prevented by setting a network password.
According to various statements, it is though important that the online connection's owner's rights have to be protected, so the owner would not be held liable after some third party misuse of the open, unprotected line.
Finland has so far had only one case where Court had given a sentence for unauthorized surfing in an unencrypted WiFi network.
Quote