“Reading more into this thread... guy was an idiot and should have hired a lawyer.
Then again... he was probably to much of a cheap skate to do that.”
My last word;
It might not cost you up front but there are consequences to being a cheap skate, this guy found out what they were.
If he hadn’t chosen to be a cheap skate he would not be where he is now.
It was his choice to be a cheap skate, that choice is square one in this story, the primary event which all others follow.
The shop owner said;
“”He could have just come in the cafe, even if he didn’t have any money, I would let him get on it,” May said.
May said that the wireless connection is free for customers to her cafe.”
So why choose to be a cheap skate?
He could have has fast interent at home for a year for $400.
It is the freeloader “take everything I can, at as little cost to me, for as long as I can, attitude that I’m frustrated with. It seems to be growing especially in the younger generation, and I do not see that as a good thing.
How many here do?
How can freeloading cheap skates live with themselves?
How do people become freeloading cheap skates?
That has been my point from my very first post in this thread.
The younger generation thinks the whole universe revolves around them, look at this guy, people thought he was stalking and he was oblivious to that. That’s how self-centered the young generation has become. Good grief be a little aware of what’s going on around you, be somewhat coherent of the possible consequences of your own actions, don’t make it look like you are stalking on someone - this isn’t rocket science.
It might be legal to be a cheap skate but it isn’t ethical, and like all other personal choices there are consequences.
So, he did nothing illegal, but got what he had coming? Because he didn’t buy a cup of coffee?
While I do sympathize with your over-all position and agree with it in large part, I cannot help but consider it "picking nits" in this instance (casual use of open air connections).
If a business has an exterior drinking fountain, it is not considered a trespass to use that fountain without the owner's permission. That is what it is there for.
Likewise, if you were to go to the effort of installing said fountain by the sidewalk on your own property, many would use the fountain and it would not even occur to them to ask your permission. There is a tacit permission assumed because the fountain is by the sidewalk, and that is what fountains are for.
Your benevolence would be noted by many. "What a great guy," they would say...
But if you were to sit on your porch and shoo them away from the fountain because it is on your private property, one would have to wonder why you installed the fountain in the first place.
Certainly one could not accuse those who pass by on the basis of their assumption, even though the letter of the law is on the side of the property owner.
In much the same fashion, open air found at the curb is a welcome relief to those passing by (I am speaking of a quick DL, e-mail, or web-search, not a permanent connection), except the tacit permission is more explicit as permission is actually given in the form of an IP addy assigned by the DHCP server.
If one desires a closed system, it is easily accomplished, denying permission to all but those one chooses. Any who crack that closed system would certainly be trespassing, as everyone would agree.
But in any other case, the server assigning IP is the very definition of permission to use the network (where DHCP is considered). There is just no getting around that fact.
-Bruce
He was on his lunch break from his job checking his e-mail, like 90% of people who have e-mail at work do. Since he didn't have e-mail at work or didn't want to use his company's e-mail to cheak his personal e-mail, he used the cafe's wifi during his lunch break. He couldn't get home to use his home ISP and manage to get back to work in 30 minutes. Given that no one had ever been prosecuted for this before in Michigan, how was he to know it would be considered illegal? From the story:
Peterson, a 39-year-old tool maker, volunteer firefighter and secretary of a bagpipe band, wanted to use his 30-minute lunch hour to check e-mails for his bagpipe group.I think another problem is that sometimes we stake out a position on something, and then after we are proven wrong, we are so afraid of 'losing face' that we refuse to back down from our position, no matter how silly the argument we start putting out to justify our position becomes. Then, once our argument deflates we resort to name calling (such as "freeloading cheap skate"). Once Chief Milanowski decided that Mr. Peterson was doing something wrong but wasn't sure if a law was being broken, he stated to research it to see if he could interpret (or misinterpret) a law to apply to this case. He didn't want to 'lose face' by admitting that Mr. Peterson wasn't doing anything wrong. This quote from Chief Milanowski is telling:[Sparta Police Chief Andrew] Milanowski doesn't believe Peterson knew he was breaking the law. "In my opinion, probably not. Most people probably don't."
Kent County Assistant Prosecutor Lynn Hopkins said, "This is the first time that we've actually charged it."
"I had a feeling a law was being broken, but I didn't know exactly what," said Sparta police chief Andrew Milanowski.
The guy probably had a decent lawyer. He was chrged with a felony and was probably left with the option of either an expensive trial and rolling the dice 12 folks who couldn’t spell HTML, or avoiding jail, paying a small fine and doing a little community service. Once charged with a felony, I can’t see the prosecutor’s office backing down much from that.