Theft of Wifi

[nick-8318]

Most of us will say its wrong, I am sure.

However, is there a real LAW preventing the use of using a neighbor's wifi network without them knowing?

I am pretty sure that in most states that it is considered legal because there is no law banning it.

Although, does anybody else know if there is, and if so provide proof?

 

[Snurf]

I think they can technically charge you for trespassing.

 

[dhscott]

In the UK, it is covered in the Communications Act of 2003:

Dishonestly obtaining electronic communications services

(1) A person who-

(a) dishonestly obtains an electronic communications service, and

(b) does so with intent to avoid payment of a charge applicable to the provision of that service,

is guilty of an offence.

(a) can get you a maximum of 6 months in jail and (b) can get you five years!

More than likely though, it's a fine and a slap on the wrist.

 

[jimmeh]

In australia its theft

 

[Peter]

Here in the Uk it is illegal as qwhois has already pointed out. The laws have been used as well for example http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4721723.stm . They have been used since as well but can't seem to find any links atm.

 

[viciouscircle]

The real issue boils down to authorization.

For example, for you living in Iowa, Iowa Code Section 716A.2 relating to computer crimes and unauthorized access states:

"A person who knowingly and without authorization accesses a computer, computer system, or computer network commits a simple misdemeanor." (http://www.legis.state.ia.us/IACODE/1999/716A/2.html)

Also, Iowa Code Section 716A.9 defines Computer theft as:

"A person commits computer theft when the person knowingly and without authorization accesses or causes to be accessed a computer, computer system, or computer network, or any part thereof, for the purpose of obtaining services, information or property or knowingly and without authorization and with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of possession, takes, transfers, conceals or retains possession of a computer, computer system, or computer network or any computer software or program, or data contained in a computer, computer system, or computer network."(http://www.legis.state.ia.us/IACODE/1999/716A/9.html)

In Iowa, computer theft, depending on the degree, ranges from a simple misdemeanor all the way to a class "C" felony.

Most states tend to have laws of similar effect. The issue that normally comes up is the definition of 'authorized access'. Which, for the most part is either undefined or poorly defined.

 

[Cookies]

It's theft.

=-Stealing is bad. -=

 

[LeetPCUser]

In theory if they leave it open and don't signify it by naming it would it still be theft? For example if they left the router number WRT54G could it be theft. You could claim that you didn't know who's it was. It's true you would still be stealing, in theory, but by not knowing exactly who's it was, could you worm your way out of it?

 

[IAmAllanShore]

Not exactly the scenario you describe, but just one example:
http://www.lotusgeek.com/SapphireOak/LotusGeekBlog.nsf/d6plinks/ROLR-6E3G95

Also, don't work so hard to justify questionable actions - it will just take you down the wrong road in the end.

-Allan

 

[Fewski]

I'm sure you could get into some trouble... but a lot of people do it. I know I visited a few peoples houses and they were getting internet off their neighbors. If the neighbor isn't to good with computers... they'll never know.

I think it's wrong, but I don't call the cops either when I see people do it.

 

[maximum]

I think it's wrong, but I don't call the cops either when I see people do it.

First it is seeing folks steal services others are paying for. What comes next? Inaction is often action. Acting to ignore a crime (both legal and moral). Not picking on you, particularly, Matt. But it brings about the question of ethics to begin with IMHO.

Besides....The mear fact this is even an issue worth questioning bothers me.

 

[Fewski]

First it is seeing folks steal services others are paying for. What comes next? Inaction is often action. Acting to ignore a crime (both legal and moral). Not picking on you, particularly, Matt. But it brings about the question of ethics to begin with IMHO.

Besides....The mear fact this is even an issue worth questioning bothers me.

I'm not saying it's right... but if I call the cops and say someone is stealing their neighbors internet connection I highly doudt they'll send someone there. IMO, they have way more important things to do.

Not trying to push buttons or anything, I know it's not right, but I don't see it as something to call the cops about and waste their time with.

 

[nick-8318]

The real issue boils down to authorization.
Also, Iowa Code Section 716A.9 defines Computer theft as:

"A person commits computer theft when the person knowingly and without authorization accesses or causes to be accessed a computer, computer system, or computer network, or any part thereof, for the purpose of obtaining services, information or property or knowingly and without authorization and with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of possession, takes, transfers, conceals or retains possession of a computer, computer system, or computer network or any computer software or program, or data contained in a computer, computer system, or computer network."(http://www.legis.state.ia.us/IACODE/1999/716A/9.html)

That section says "and with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of possession, takes, transfers, conceals or retains possession of a computer, computer system, or computer network or any computer software or program, or data contained in a computer, computer system, or computer network."

It's kind of hard to interpret, that section is basically saying its not theft as long as you don't cause any permanent problems.

"A person who knowingly and without authorization accesses a computer, computer system, or computer network commits a simple misdemeanor." (http://www.legis.state.ia.us/IACODE/1999/716A/2.html)

Like you said, it boils down to authorization.
Some people may say it means something else, with good reasoning. I have never seen those law pages before and it cleary shows that interpretation can be difficult.

--

First it is seeing folks steal services others are paying for. What comes next? Inaction is often action. Acting to ignore a crime (both legal and moral). Not picking on you, particularly, Matt. But it brings about the question of ethics to begin with IMHO.

It's not really a question about ethics, imo stealing services like wifi is a bad thing. The real question is "Is there a law that clearly states that stealing wifi, or a similar service, is illegal?" and if there isn't, why isn't there one?

Calling the cops on an issue like this won't do much good, unless the person doing it is using the network for illegal purposes.

 

[Peter]

Besides....The mear fact this is even an issue worth questioning bothers me.

Correct me if I am wrong but you are the 1 that started the debate

 

[AGS]

Isn't there a possibility to protect the wifi at source with a password?

I have a lappy but it's hardwired from my PC

 

[nick-8318]

Correct me if I am wrong but you are the 1 that started the debate

oops, that was in a quote from maximum that I didn't get out of my reply

i'll edit that out

 

[viciouscircle]

The real issue boils down to authorization.
Also, Iowa Code Section 716A.9 defines Computer theft as:

"A person commits computer theft when the person knowingly and without authorization accesses or causes to be accessed a computer, computer system, or computer network, or any part thereof, for the purpose of obtaining services, information or property or knowingly and without authorization and with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of possession, takes, transfers, conceals or retains possession of a computer, computer system, or computer network or any computer software or program, or data contained in a computer, computer system, or computer network."(http://www.legis.state.ia.us/IACODE/1999/716A/9.html)

That section says "and with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of possession, takes, transfers, conceals or retains possession of a computer, computer system, or computer network or any computer software or program, or data contained in a computer, computer system, or computer network."

It's kind of hard to interpret, that section is basically saying its not theft as long as you don't cause any permanent problems.

Sorry, but I believe you're reading it wrong. It is split into two main categories...
A person commits computer theft when:

a.) the person knowingly and without authorization accesses or causes to be accessed a computer, computer system, or computer network, or any part thereof, for the purpose of obtaining services, information or property

b.) or knowingly and without authorization and with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of possession, takes, transfers, conceals or retains possession of a computer, computer system, or computer network or any computer software or program, or data contained in a computer, computer system, or computer network.

Notice the phrase "knowingly and without authorization" being used to start both categories.

 

[LeetPCUser]

I think this is dumb. There should be a law passed if you don't password protect it then you are an idiot. Seriously, even if it is a weak password you make an attempt at preventing others from using it. I mean they had to figure out someone was using it via the control panel and ip capturing or someone got in a lot of trouble for downloading songs or something. This is another reason why the United States is becoming a liberal piece of **** that everyone hates.

 

[HHDomains]

So I guess if you happen to leave your door open and someone decides to stroll in and clean you out you would have no problem with that?
After all, it certainly isn't the criminal's fault it's always the victim.

 

[maximum]

So I guess if you happen to leave your door open and someone decides to stroll in and clean you out you would have no problem with that?
After all, it certainly isn't the criminal's fault it's always the victim.

you hit the head on the proverbial nail