Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: swain_forkbeard
The owner of the wireless router is transmitting. So, if anyone is trespasssing first, it’s him. But these analogies from the world of physical property and physical access just don’t work that well for the issues surrounding intellectual property, information assets, bandwidth, etc...

Technically, no. He's not trespassing. All routers are designed under FCC rules and regulations (FCC Part 15 regs) that those devices can and do transmit without licensing, must NOT interfere with other services, and MUST ACCEPT interference from other services.

Basically, this means that the owner of ANY router is not required to have a license to transmit. So, he is not "trespassing".

To access a router, however you MUST make an EFFORT to make the connection. That is, you must tell the computer (under windows for instance) that you WANT to connect to "an unsecured device" - because Windows ASKS this question of you when it notices the router broadcast.

As I mentioned before, I can set up and modify a router to have a much HIGHER power out put, different antennas and so forth, and be able to say, connect to my home router from 20 miles away. I can NOT legally encrypt that signal either, and must allow other Amateur Radio operators to use it. Others who are not hams could legitimately use that signal if their equipment is close enough and I can't do much about it. I CAN protect it by hiding the id broadcast, but under FCC rules, I can't do that either. I CAN lock out all wireless addresses EXCEPT those I am using with my machines. Thus, I can protect, without using any encryption at all, my system

So technically, a radio signal isn't really 'trespassing'.. /shrug
39 posted on 01/07/2008 11:26:41 AM PST by Rick.Donaldson (http://www.transasianaxis.com - Visit for lastest on DPRK/Russia/China/Etc --Fred Thompson for Prez.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]


To: Rick.Donaldson

I wasn’t talking FCC regs. They are what they are.

I was talking ethics and more specifically the limited usefulness of analogies.


45 posted on 01/07/2008 11:33:04 AM PST by swain_forkbeard (Rationality may not be sufficient, but it is necessary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies ]

To: Rick.Donaldson
To access a router, however you MUST make an EFFORT to make the connection. That is, you must tell the computer (under windows for instance) that you WANT to connect to "an unsecured device" - because Windows ASKS this question of you when it notices the router broadcast.

On some popular non-Windows platforms, the radio can be configured to automatically find and connect to the best signal without notifying the user. I typically use that mode.

The burden belongs to the access point operator to take affirmative steps to limit access with encryption, password protection, MAC filtering, etc. If the access point is wide open on an unlicensed frequency, it should be considered a public-access connection.

85 posted on 01/07/2008 12:01:44 PM PST by HAL9000 (Fred Thompson/Mike Huckabee 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson