Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
I was talking about the situation where a person deliberately leaves their WiFi unsecured as a form of immunity from prosecution, should they be caught. This seems very wrong to me.
|
A downloader would want all of their bandwidth for themselves, they wouldn't want to share it with their neighbours. That defence wouldn't work anyway if there was any requirement for evidence and not just the assumption of guilt upon accusation.
Why weren't these sort of things brought up at the discussion stage, do you suppose?