Posted on 02/24/2007 6:58:29 PM PST by conservative in nyc
Brian Tanner was sitting in his Acura Integra recently outside the Palmer Library playing online games when a Palmer police pulled up behind him.
The officer asked him what he was doing.
Tanner, 21, was using the library's wireless Internet connection. He was told that his activity constituted theft of services and was told to leave. The next day, Sunday, police spotted him there again.
"It was kind of like, 'Well gee whiz, come on,' " police Lt. Tom Remaley said.
The police officer confiscated Tanner's laptop in order to inspect what he may have been downloading, Remaley said. Remaley on Friday said he hasn't looked inside the computer yet; he's putting together a search warrant application.
Alaska state troopers had chased Tanner off a few times at other locations, Remaley said.
Tanner said that was true. He has a device on his keychain that sniffs out wireless networks. When he found one, he would park in his neighborhood and use his $800 Dell laptop to hop on the Web. But worried neighbors summoned the troopers, who told him to park in a public place.
"I went to the public library because I go there during the day," Tanner said.
Though the library was closed, its wireless was up and running, he said.
Tanner said he was upset that he hasn't gotten his computer back yet. The police have told him he won't until the case is concluded, he said.
Jeanne Novosad, the library system manager, said the wireless connection is normally shut off when the library is closed. But the library was waiting on a technician to install a timer and the connection was left on after hours for several days, she said.
(Excerpt) Read more at adn.com ...
"When you set up a machine to broadcast "Hey! I'm here! Free and open access! Yes you may attach, with no key required!" that's giving permission."
Ridiculous.
You hang you coat on a hook in a restaurant. I guess it's OK for me to take it.
It's wrong. You can take it, but it's wrong. It's not yours.
You seem to think posting "Come In" on an unlocked door should be treated like "keep out" on a locked door.
"Things" can give people permission to do things all the time. If a store has a pile of leaflets which say in large letters "TAKE ONE" and someone takes one, that person could hardly be accused of shoplifting.
It could be verboten under Federal law under some provision having to do with security of computer systems, but if the Alaska police agency involved isn't Federally deputized that matter is out of their bailiwick, as it were.
I haven't heard of anything like this happening on the hard wired World Wide Web, where someone who put their server on the web, without meaning to but also without posting a warning against access, got a crime charged against someone who brought up a web page on their site. The Federal provision would require some sort of warning, if applied to the hard wired Web.
State law could be anything.
The telephone circuits are the property of the telephone company, leased to customers for their exclusive use.
Cell phone frequencies are the property of the telcos, and the temporary spectral assignments are effectively leased to customers for their exclusive use.
Cordless phones with landline base stations use public frequencies that are neither owned nor leased by anyone. Anything one can receive by listening in on such phones is fair game.
But if he were inside the library, downloading Kiddie Porn instead of just gaming in the parking lot, he would've gotten a pass from the ALA. *Rolleyes*
"using another's wireless" ping
We actually invite people to use the WiFi if they can get it.
In the parking lot, park, or just on the steps. Internet for everyone!
Whenever I hear someone talk about raising taxes for police, I point out stories like this and the swat teams breaking down doors and shooting some old man on a warrant to search for marijuana. It is clear that the public agencies still have too much money.
It would make more sense if the cop had said that he wasn't supposed to be parked in the parking lot and wrote him a ticket. But instead the cop told him he was illegally stealing the signal and confiscated his laptop.
See the line item tax on your phone bill - (they don't call it a tax) - Universal Service Fund...
I wonder if they allow patrons to read borrowed books when the library is closed.
No, they like anyone to look at porn in the libraries.
Er... because you can use wireless internet to find out which wire to clip in your scanner to re-enable mobile phone frequencies.
Not that it's worth doing; other people's random conversations are BORING. Or so I've been told....
"The loss of the concept of right and wrong is a bad thing."
There's right and there's wrong, and then there's legal and illegal. You can argue all day about which is the correct choice, but IMHO, ANY unsecured wireless network is just plain STUPID and SUICIDAL.
I'm glad the police checked this guy out. What would your position be if this guy's name was not Tanner but was Mohammed or Aachmed? Would you still be focused on whether his activity was legal or illegal or if it was right or wrong?
Free WiFi sounds great, but it just makes the job of tracking and finding terrorists that much harder, if not impossible. Pay for your network connections and make sure they are secure. There's a war going on and 'Loose Lips Sink Ships" - so can free WiFi.
(And that's not even considering the viruses, trojan horses, and hackers out there.)
Not most. I just grabbed the Philly policies since that was one of the first that popped up:
"You may not use the Site to: (i) perform any activity which is or may be, directly or indirectly, unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, tortious, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, invasive of anothers privacy, hateful or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable;..."
http://www.library.phila.gov/policies/flptou.htm
See also
http://www.library.phila.gov/policies/ps90.htm
So what you are using it for may be relevant.
And if he was using it, instead of a connection that can be traced back to him for an illicit purpose, his best defense is going to be whether the search of the computer was legal.
The story so far seems to be that he was using it for completely legitimate gaming, in which case he should get the machine back with a big apology.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.