Using Kindle WI-FI could get YOU Arrested! - Page 3

DiapDealer · 09-10-2010, 07:38 AM

I leave my WiFi unprotected on purpose. I'm a sharing kind of guy.
The mailman and the cable guy seem to really appreciate it on their lunch breaks.

So, in light of this potential legal sh*tstorm I'm going to rename my WiFi network "Walk Right In I Won't Press Charges" just so nobody gets accidentally arrested due to my generosity.

HarryT · 09-10-2010, 07:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I leave my WiFi unprotected on purpose. I'm a sharing kind of guy.
The mailman and the cable guy seem to really appreciate it on their lunch breaks.

So, in light of this potential legal sh*tstorm I'm going to rename my WiFi network "Walk Right In I Won't Press Charges" just so nobody gets accidentally arrested due to my generosity.

The "shit" might arise if someone takes advantage of your generosity to download kiddieporn via your connection. It's you who could well end up in the can as a result. Take care!

ricsmania · 09-10-2010, 07:46 AM

I don't ever use wifi signal that clearly comes from a house.

However, if I'm in a shopping mall for example, I always use the first available wifi spot. I don't care if it's public or not, because honestly it's hard to know that when you are in such a place.

Many home users really leave their wifi hotspots unprotected because they have no knowledge of what that is or how to do it, so it's unfair if someone uses their signal without authorization.

On the other hand, commercial users who leave their wifi unprotected I see no problem in using it, because if they don't want it to be public they should pay someone to protect it.

DiapDealer · 09-10-2010, 08:05 AM

Quote:

The "shit" might arise if someone takes advantage of your generosity to download kiddieporn via your connection. It's you who could well end up in the can as a result. Take care!

In that case, an open wireless network would be a defense-lawyer's wet-dream when it came time for my trial.

HarryT · 09-10-2010, 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

In that case, an open wireless network would be a defense-lawyer's wet-dream when it came time for my trial.

That would depend. I don't know if it's different where you live, but in the UK it's you who are deemed legally responsible for what your broadband connection is used for.

karthwyne · 09-10-2010, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

You don't have the right to go and sit in someone's living room and watch their TV if they go out and leave their house door unlocked. Using their WiFi network is really not much different.

Actually, yes it is very different. It is more akin to complaining that I am listening to the music someone is blaring at 3am. If the signal is trespassing off of the originator's property, they don't have much right to complain if someone casually intercepts it.

If the person trespasses ONTO the property where the wifi is in order to use it, then it is like the situation you described.

HarryT · 09-10-2010, 08:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by karthwyne

Actually, yes it is very different. It is more akin to complaining that I am listening to the music someone is blaring at 3am. If the signal is trespassing off of the originator's property, they don't have much right to complain if someone casually intercepts it.

That's rather like arguing that it's OK to watch TV without a licence merely because the signals are passing through your house

. I wish you luck in presenting that argument to a judge...

karthwyne · 09-10-2010, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

That's rather like arguing that it's OK to watch TV without a licence merely because the signals are passing through your house

. I wish you luck in presenting that argument to a judge...

In the US, I can. It would never get anywhere near a judge. Same way we can have police scanners.
So yes, it is OK to watch TV signals that are on my property, even if I have to devise a way to decrypt the signal.

HarryT · 09-10-2010, 09:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by karthwyne

In the US, I can. It would never get anywhere near a judge. Same way we can have police scanners.
So yes, it is OK to watch TV signals that are on my property, even if I have to devise a way to decrypt the signal.

Forgive me, but I don't believe you are correct. Please do correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty certain that it's illegal in the US to decrypt satellite TV without paying for it. The "if the signals are on my property, I can do whatever I want with them" argument has no legal validity.

church mouse · 09-10-2010, 09:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by karthwyne

Actually, yes it is very different. It is more akin to complaining that I am listening to the music someone is blaring at 3am. If the signal is trespassing off of the originator's property, they don't have much right to complain if someone casually intercepts it.

If the person trespasses ONTO the property where the wifi is in order to use it, then it is like the situation you described.

These comparisons are odious.

You have no idea, if you make unauthorised use of someone's wi-fi, what financial (or other) cost that may have to the person whose set-up you are using.

A hypothetical extreme (I like hypothetical extremes, because if the extreme seems ok then no problem, if the extreme seems wrong then look at your principle) - X has an ISP who charges for every Mb of usage, Y picks up X's unsecure wi-fi signal and downloads a ton of stuff, leaving X with a bill he cannot afford to pay.

Does anyone truly not see this as wrong conduct on the part of Y? If wrong for Y, then wrong full-stop it seems to me.

DiapDealer · 09-10-2010, 09:48 AM

I really don't care to argue the legality of hypotheticals, I just get a chuckle out of people who go to such great lengths to "protect" their wireless network. All you're achieving is keeping the harmless "meddler" from getting themselves in trouble. Just like locking your door will only protect you against the casual thief. "Secure Wireless" is an oxymoron.

karthwyne · 09-10-2010, 09:48 AM

It is not something that I do, and IANAL, but I am rather certain that neither the ownership nor use of such a black box is illegal (in the US). It is the sale of such a device (that has no other purpose than to circumvent satellite encryption) that is illegal. The sale of instructions on how to build such a device is legal.

However, there is a huge difference between between using unsecure wifi or watching over the air TV, and purposefully acting to hack/break/crack a signal that has tried to be secure (whether wifi or TV). The difference between hearing someone's loud music and placing bugs in order to hear their music.

HarryT · 09-10-2010, 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by karthwyne

However, there is a huge difference between between using unsecure wifi or watching over the air TV, and purposefully acting to hack/break/crack a signal that has tried to be secure (whether wifi or TV). The difference between hearing someone's loud music and placing bugs in order to hear their music.

Certainly there is a difference. However, whatever the situation may be in the US, it is an undeniable fact that using someone's WiFi network without permission is a crime in the UK (which is what this thread is about), and that people can be - and have been - prosecuted for it.

However, given that this is something which is impossible to do "accidentally" with the Kindle 3, I'm certainly not going to lose any sleep over it.

HarryT · 09-10-2010, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I really don't care to argue the legality of hypotheticals, I just get a chuckle out of people who go to such great lengths to "protect" their wireless network. All you're achieving is keeping the harmless "meddler" from getting themselves in trouble. Just like locking your door will only protect you against the casual thief. "Secure Wireless" is an oxymoron.

WPA2 encryption is pretty secure. It probably can be broken by organizations with a convenient supercomputer at hand, such as the NSA, but it's certainly secure against any lesser form of attack. Unlike WEP, which can be cracked by any script-kiddie.

karthwyne · 09-10-2010, 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

it is an undeniable fact that using someone's WiFi network without permission is a crime in the UK (which is what this thread is about), and that people can be - and have been - prosecuted for it.

However, given that this is something which is impossible to do "accidentally" with the Kindle 3, I'm certainly not going to lose any sleep over it.

Agreed with almost all of that

I disagree in the point of the thread, I think the OP is a troll.

If the people of the UK agree with the law, that is what matters. My non-resident views have no consequence.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Using Kindle as weapon could get YOU Arrested	pdurrant	Amazon Kindle	14	09-17-2010 06:54 PM
Seriously thoughtful Peter Watts arrested at US border	TadW	Lounge	19	12-12-2009 08:29 AM
$0.01 in Kindle Store: Interactive Sudoku for Kindle 2 and Kindle DX - Volume 1	Xia	Deals and Resources (No Self-Promotion or Affiliate Links)	2	11-07-2009 10:06 AM
Arrested Development, anyone watched it?	Catire	Lounge	0	08-14-2009 09:56 AM

09-10-2010, 07:38 AM	#31
DiapDealer Grand Sorcerer Posts: 28,574 Karma: 204127028 Join Date: Jan 2010 Device: Nexus 7, Kindle Fire HD	I leave my WiFi unprotected on purpose. I'm a sharing kind of guy. The mailman and the cable guy seem to really appreciate it on their lunch breaks. So, in light of this potential legal sh*tstorm I'm going to rename my WiFi network "Walk Right In I Won't Press Charges" just so nobody gets accidentally arrested due to my generosity.

09-10-2010, 07:46 AM	#33
ricsmania Connoisseur Posts: 61 Karma: 40 Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Brazil Device: Kindle 3 3G+Wifi	I don't ever use wifi signal that clearly comes from a house. However, if I'm in a shopping mall for example, I always use the first available wifi spot. I don't care if it's public or not, because honestly it's hard to know that when you are in such a place. Many home users really leave their wifi hotspots unprotected because they have no knowledge of what that is or how to do it, so it's unfair if someone uses their signal without authorization. On the other hand, commercial users who leave their wifi unprotected I see no problem in using it, because if they don't want it to be public they should pay someone to protect it.

09-10-2010, 09:48 AM	#41
DiapDealer Grand Sorcerer Posts: 28,574 Karma: 204127028 Join Date: Jan 2010 Device: Nexus 7, Kindle Fire HD	I really don't care to argue the legality of hypotheticals, I just get a chuckle out of people who go to such great lengths to "protect" their wireless network. All you're achieving is keeping the harmless "meddler" from getting themselves in trouble. Just like locking your door will only protect you against the casual thief. "Secure Wireless" is an oxymoron.

09-10-2010, 09:48 AM	#42
karthwyne Connoisseur Posts: 59 Karma: 480 Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Atlanta, GA Device: Kindle Wifi, Kindle US	It is not something that I do, and IANAL, but I am rather certain that neither the ownership nor use of such a black box is illegal (in the US). It is the sale of such a device (that has no other purpose than to circumvent satellite encryption) that is illegal. The sale of instructions on how to build such a device is legal. However, there is a huge difference between between using unsecure wifi or watching over the air TV, and purposefully acting to hack/break/crack a signal that has tried to be secure (whether wifi or TV). The difference between hearing someone's loud music and placing bugs in order to hear their music.