Utter rubbish!
A broadcast radio or TV signal is transmitted for free for all to RECEIVE. A WiFi connection is two way connection of limited bandwidth and is being paid for by someone else. The comparison ends from the moment that you TRANSMIT a request on that link and then consume some of the limited bandwidth with your transmissions and responses thereby affecting performance for the owner of the link.
BTW, go to the UK and receive a TV signal without paying for a TV licence and see if they don't prosecute you for theft
Are you the type that folds toilet paper four times before using it?
Maybe the guy picked a poor example.
Utilizing a restaurant's wi-fi is sort of like stopping in to using their restroom. They can stop you if they want to, but they usually don't. When you wash your hands or flush the toilet, you reduce they water pressure that can be delivered to their dishwashers, but it's usually so insignificant that the dishwashers will keep working just as they would have if you hadn't stopped by. In fact restroom use does have a small paper and maybe maintenance cost to the restaurant. I wonder if you consider that stealing. These costs have no analog associated with the drive-by wi-fiers.
ML/NJ
Which proves that the UK is an insane nation of serfs - so what?
The proper comparison is to a TV set in a bar tuned to the Big Game. It's intended to draw in customers. The bartender could throw out anyone he sees strolling in and watches the game fro some extended time X without buying a drink. He would not be able to arrest such a person for trespass unless he became abusive and refused to move along when requested.
Your wireless router is also transmitting a signal to my laptop without my permission. Maybe you should go to jail for that.
Do you have a license to transmit that signal onto my property?