Man Arrested For Using Coffee Shop's Wireless Signal

Man Arrested For Using Coffee Shop's Wireless Signal

POSTED: 1:40 pm EDT June 22, 2006
UPDATED: 2:15 pm EDT June 22, 2006

A 20-year-old man in Vancouver, Wash., was charged with theft of services for allegedly sitting in a coffee shop parking lot and using its wireless Internet service for months, according to a report.

Wireless

The manager of the Brewed Awakenings coffee shop, Emily Pranger, said she noticed a man would come and sit in the business's parking lot for at least three months. She said for hours at a time, he would piggyback on the stores wireless service for free.

Sheriff's deputies told the man to go away at one point but apparently he returned.

The man, identified by KATU-TV as Alexander Eric Smith of Battle Ground, was charged with theft of services.

http://www.local6.com/news/9411597/detail.html

and my neighbor "borrows" it, well, that's MY problem, isn't it?

Redstone

That's like saying if you don't secure your bicycle and someone steals it, it's not a crime.

The guy was asked to knock it off and didn't heed the warning. He made his own bed.

that it's a bit more like reading the comic books down at the 7-11 without actually buying them.

Only not as bad.

Redstone

I somewhat agree, but not entirely. I used a terrible example, lol.

This is what it's like: You go to a spa, where there are steam rooms for customers who buy a massage. Some clown keeps coming in and using the steam room without buying a massage. Theft of services.

The wireless isn't "free" to anyone, it's "free" to those who have purchased goods from the coffee place.

Making it illegal to use it is like making it illegal to listen to the radio. There are any number of ways that the coffee shop could restrict the use of the signal, but they chose to broadcast it on an open protocol, public frequency, etc. It's like hanging a sign up in the open but then saying "you can't look at it without permission."

If they didn't want non-customers using the network connection then a daily pass phrase is all it would take to prevent it. Takes less than a minute to set up every morning when they boot the server. They could post it on a bulletin board so the clerks wouldn't even have to remember it.

But they do pay for their bandwidth.

Ask BMI and ASCAP.

Bill

My mistake.

system--if they play music over a stereo without detachable speakers, they don't have to pay royalties (at least, that was the case about five years ago).

....because you are "enhancing" your business. If you play it in the back-room where only your employees can hear it you don't have to pay because it is considered private use. I don't think it has anything to do with the type of system.

As does what music you play--if you play pre-recorded music, there's probably no way out of the licensing fees. But if you play the radio, even where your customers can hear it, you don't have to pay unless you actually re-transmit the signal. If you're just playing the radio out of a stereo, or even out of the stereo and a small set of disconnected speakers, you're okay.

The restaurant where my wife worked during college once forbade employees from playing their own CDs in the store so that they could avaoid paying licensing fees. This, naturally, led to employee revolt because every local radio station, of course, completely sucked. Eventually the owners relented.

Anyway, here's the ASCAP FAQ (this is covered in questions 1 and 8, but the regulations themselves are a pretty fascinating web) ... http://www.ascap.com/licensing/generalfaq.html

Here's the pertinent part from question 8:

I worked in a car dealership that got pinched. It was explained to me differently but this makes sense. I always thought that would be the ideal sales-job. Walk in to places of business and MAKE THEM PAY or get sued. That's what happened to us.

My wife was in the store when the ASCAP rep came in, and said she was extremely pushy to people not making enough money to really care (and obviously without the authority to do anything about it).

But I think it would definitely be the ideal sales job ;)

a wireless signal. Unless you're actually hacking or doing something deleterious to someone else, what's the crime?

Sometimes I go into a restaurant and have several unsecured signals pop up. As long as I get a good link, I don't give much thought to whether or not I'm on the "right" connection.

you got it in a nutshell, he took nothing from them by using the free wireless, what's wrong w. people?

From the owner of the shop who PAYS for the connection (it's not free) and from the paying customers who weren't being freeloaders.

see my other post

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1488071&mesg_id=1489242

Just because you can DETECT other networks from your house, doesn't mean you should connect to them. They're not putting their bandwidth in your house, and that's a stupid fucking argument. Their router is in THEIR house, and brodcasts to other machines in THEIR house. So it sounds more like you're connecting to a router in someone elses house you have NO business connecting to. Connecting to someone elses unsecured network is just as wrong as connecting to someone elses secured network by hacking into it. Either way, you're connecting to a network you don't belong on.

A good neighbor would contact the owner of the unsecured network and show them how to secure it. Many people just don't know how. Do they really deserve to have their bandwidth stolen?

it's mine

i have no idea which neighbor is doing this and i am not abt to start knocking on doors to find out

if whoever is spewing cared, he or she or they or it would have done something about it

the fact is NOTHING is being taken from them that they miss, the ONLY benefit is that i am saved a few $$$

i am sorry you resent that

but the air in my house is still MY air

You don't know if they max out their bandwidth every month and need every bit they can get. If you see mooching off neighbors who aren't tech savvy (maybe old people or something) as a benefit to you, I guess that's between you and your conscience.

They are probably go to call the cops.

you're a certifiable asshole.

What does it make you if you call the cops on a registered sex offender hanging out for 8 hours a day surfing porn in your parking lot.

Thanks for playing.

Redstone

Anyway, I hope this is a short-term problem & we'll end up with ubiquitous broadband.

Not securing wireless is like putting a sign on the bike saying "Free".

...which is where your unsecured wireless signal ends up. If you display a signal in public, on the public airways, on an open protocol, how could you expect people to NOT use it? That's like hanging a sign in the open and arresting anyone who looks at it without permission.

Using your example (sort of) it's more like being able to see your neighbors bike at HIS house from your living room window. Now, when he's at work, you could go take it for a ride. You could do that every day for months. He may not even know you're doing it. He's not being harmed in any way. However, it's HIS bike and you SHOULDN'T be riding it. It would make you a shitbag.

here has an insecure network I hopped on. Actually, 5 people around here do....

It's like putting a sign on your bike that says "Go ahead and ride me!" (SSID broadcast), and then getting upset when someone does. If you don't want your network used, turn off SSID Broadcast, and turn on a key.

If they did, they'd have to tell their patrons the WEP key so they could use their network while they were in the shop, but all you'd have to do then is buy a cop of coffee, get the key, and then freeload for months. So that's why they leave these "hot spot" coffee shops unsecured.

Redstone

That would inconvenience the paying customers. Why not post a written policy that simply states "our WiFi is for paying customers only blah blah blah." That won't prevent people from being parking lot freeloaders, but it will give the shop a leg to stand on if they actually chose to prosecute.

...to enter a pass phrase for a WEP key-- and the key could be just the name of a menu item, or a random word from the dictionary, etc. They're just trying to block casual access, not run a really secure network. Entering a new key from a master list could just be one of the daily startup chores, like turning on the lights.

the freeloader might use binoculars to read the key!!

:rofl:

Oh my heavens the thieves and shitbags who pilfer free data access!! Send em to Gitmo! :sarcasm:

I agree 100% about no WEP... they can't complain and certainly there should be no arrests if your silly enough to put up an unsecured access point. BUT... what if they had and this person snorted the access point long enough to cop the key and then "borrow" the connection? Say to download kiddy pOrn....and the authorities come knockin'...

They made an honest effort within the limits of the technology but someone else took your publicly available signal, decrypted it, and used it for a "less than honest" purpose. Are they liable ?, Can they complain?, To whom ?, Is this "theft of service" since the signal was public and the technology flawed ?

Granted there are mostly rhetorical questions to again point out that our ability has surpassed our legislation, common sense, and above all decency.

MZr7

since the customers could just as easily be downloading kiddie porn. they don't police content in the shop, so content is irrelevant, and bringing it up a distraction.

We have broadband, wireless service; and I could care less if someone else is getting my signal. As long as it does no harm to me, what the hell is the problem. I certainly don't mind sharing. Am I being naive? Can they steal something from me that I don't know about?

If your network is unsecured, they can view any and all files on any PC connected to your router.

I'm not aware of any, so how can he even be charged with a crime?

In a residential area and doing the same thing.

edit: I found it:
snip>
Any doubts you may still have about the legality of wireless trespass should have been dissolved at the news earlier this year that a Florida man was arrested for accessing someone else's wireless connection. Benjamin Smith III was arrested in April for sitting outside the home of Richard Dinon and accessing his wireless Internet connection, according to press reports. Dinon called police after noticing Smith using a laptop in a vehicle outside Dinon's home. Dinon was wise to call. When someone is piggybacking off your wireless access, it's called "war driving" after the movie War Games, with Matthew Broderick. And often, cybercriminals, knowing that they could be traced back to their accounts using IP addresses, sit in their car on your street using your open access. When the FBI comes looking for the person downloading movies or child pornography, or luring children or sending denial-of-service attacks, they come looking for the person whose account was used, not the war driver. While you may be able to prove that your computer wasn't used for these illegal activities, or that no one was home at the time the activities occurred, it can be very tricky. It's far easier to secure your network with a passphrase.

snip>

Parry Aftab is a cyberspace lawyer, specializing in online privacy and security law, and she's also executive director of WiredSafety. She hosts the Web site aftab.com and blogs regularly at theprivacylawyer.blogspot.com.

http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=167100929

reading comic books without buying them.

And it isn't included in the story, re: what the guy was surfing for.

Is the coffee shop offering the Wi Fi for free anyway? Or do you have to pay for it along with your coffee? :shrug:

If it's free, what's the difference between sitting in the parking lot and sitting a table inside?

A cyber-can of worms, as it seems

Their WiFi is for patrons only.

There are 3 of us with wireless routers in a triangle. We all have security and we all still pick up each others' networks. I can't get into their computers, they can't get into mine, I'm already running 6 computers off the router with no appreciable loss of signal so what's one more?

Unless your changing keys about every day.

If your an "average" home user surfing the web, reading mail, etc... that key can be cracked in a couple of weeks max. If you are really using bandwidth for things like audio/video downloads, etc, much less time is needed. BTW... the more chatter on your private net, the quicker the key can be cracked.

sleep well.

MZr7

Bush lovers that I want as little to do with as possible.

And if you broadcast it, anyone was allowed to receive it. Then we auctioned it off and let lobbyists write our communications law.

Securing the network and giving a password to customers is a more practical solution. A better case could be made if the parking lot was signed "For customers only" and he was charged with trespassing.

If he wasn't a customer..
But for using the wireless signal? It's not that hard to secure the signal.

with illegal use of the WiFi, cause that's all they could come up with, when in reality, it was more a matter of removing a guy who was making the workers there nervous. By the way, I think the poaching charge is nuts. You leave it open, you take the risk.


"Assistant manager Rachel Stemson at Brewed Awakenings said it's not the first time they've had trouble with WiFi poaching, but Smith was more persistent.

She said he had parked his pickup truck in the parking lot nearly every day, for as long as 8 hours at a time, since they had gotten wireless Internet service four months ago."

snip

“We told him he was using it illegally and he could come inside otherwise you’re going to have to leave,” Stemson said.

snip

Stemson said the next time the shop's employees saw Smith they called the sheriff’s office. "We finally got fed up and called police," she said.

When deputies arrived, she said, Smith was linked to the free Internet advertising Web site craigslist.com's erotic services section.

She said deputies told her Smith is registered in Clark County as a Level 1 sex offender.

“It does make me feel uneasy,” she said of the information. “There are just two of us at night. And you’d go out in the parking lot and he was there.”

http://www.kgw.com/news-local/stories/kgw_062206_news_wireless_poaching.b09d5cb6.html (registration require. Sorry. Tried to find it elsewhere)

1. Determine the freeloader' MAC address of his wireless interface.
2. Add the mac Address to a 'ban list' on the wireless router they've installed.

3. Each time you see him in the parkinglot, search for all connected machines, and add his newly bought nic card's MAC address to the ban list.
4. repeat step 3 until the guy goes away.

And very easy.

All yer freeloader needs is a NIC on which the MAC is configurable and your spending more time chasing him than he's worth.

You present an unconsidered corner case, to an otherwise fine theoretical solution. :)

search for all machines connected?

Lets not forget we live in a Capitalistic society and we have what we have today for that very reason. Stealing is stealing no matter how you try to sugar coat it.

P.S. some of the analogy's I have read here are really ridiculous.

On EDIT: spelling

on it. Don't most networks require you to secure your wireless?

.... An unsecured router/access point is LITERALLY ASKING for any compatible card to connect to it.

The idea that accepting an OFFER to connect could be construed as "theft" is asinine.

But yah - trespassing or loitering sounds like an excellent thing to charge him with.


EDIT: Amazing what a difference the letters "un" can make.

Just because people CAN connect, doesn't mean they should.

And given our litigious society (talk about a contradiction in terms!), more people on the consuming side need to be vigilant as to what those on the supplying side are doing.

Still, to trespass by loitering in the cark park for hours on end, mooching free internet bandwidth isn't nice. Especially when the store doesn't sound like a big national corporate chain fuzz, not that that makes any difference, probably.

automatic connecting to an unsecured network can be.
IMO, to charge people on something like this is nuts.

If I leave my car in the driveway am I putting a FREE sign on it? Fuck no, stealing it is still wrong, just like it's wrong in this case.

No, many shops offer free WiFi hotspots for their PAYING customers.

And at some point the indignant folks saying how this is just like stealing, must admit it's a rather petty crime. The freeloader lurking in the parking lot is the more serious crime that had an effect on the coffee shop.

Leaving your wireless gateway wide open with no encryption key is very much like leaving your garage door open all day. It's a basic precaution that folks who run businesses need to be aware of. Phsycial plant security is understood by the cofeee shop, I'm sure they lock it up at closing time.

If someone stole something from my garage while i was gone, and my garage door was open all day, am I partially to blame? You'd probably say that I was "asking for it".

Are we like precolumbian mesoamaericans (azten inca maya I cant remember :) ) who respect the small pile of rocks across our digital doorways?

The unsecured router is ASKING for anyone available to connect to it. Literally ASKING. Literally. For real. I'm serious. It is.

Why do you insist on ignoring this plain fact?

I'm saying, "asking for it" doesn't make it right for someone to take it. Look, I had two unsecured networks near my house. I'm not a complete dick like some people, so I went to the nearby houses (can't reach far) told them I (and others) could see their network, and showed them how to secure it. One was some old guy living by himself. They were VERY appreciative. Just because they didn't know how to do something about it, does it mean they're "asking for it?" No, I don't think so.

Fuck, sometimes I swear I'm in fucking freeperville. The number of people here who have no problem with this astounds me!

have you looked up some of Microsoft's business practices yet? They did some sugarcoating of their own...

But they are a corporation, so that's okay. Is that it?


But for the relevant issue at hand, I agree with you. We are capitalism... unfortunately, it's not our mother's capitalism. And nowhere near grandmother's capitalism either.

... I've never tried it, but I'll bet I could find an open network in 10 minutes. And then find another one the next day. Why go back to the same one?

Here's a thought for the clueless. If this coffeeshop is running an open network they by definition have no encryption. That means that anyone using the network has no privacy.

They should be sued by the users of the network.

am i a criminal? i didn't ask whatever dumb ass neighbor is doing this to provide free wireless internet to the entire neighborhood! -- i don't even know who it is!

jeezus people, get real

if you don't want people using your service, either don't go wireless or use a freckin password

it just can't be that hard

you put stuff in parking lots and OTHER PEOPLE'S HOUSES then other people are going to use it

Down here, the cops would laugh at a shop owner who called them over something like this.

I have no problem with the FBI going after people who share files on the internet... AFTER the catch all of the terrorits in the United States. And I mean ALL of them.

Especially when "hiding in plain sight".

In a proper society, it would be participatory: Put in your worth and reap the rewards. Unfortunately, it's a little bit more complex, and good people get shoved aside. As if that matters anymore.

I'm just curious to know which web sites he visited...

networks, and they haven't changed the "standard name" of their network
either...something I learned you should do. Took me a some time to learn
"how" to secure our network, but I did it. Oh and I should add, the tech that
helped me on the phone resolve my problems...was from the Philippines (outsourcing
in action).

Anyone can log on onto to any unsecured network...example..someone comes to your
house has a wireless laptop...and bingo..pick an unsecured network to get online.

Several years ago, our local news station did a news piece on why people
need to secure their networks. I don't agree this guy should be charged..why didn't
this company/place, whatever it was, secure their network?

Even better, ask us to feel sorry for you when you lose your job because of it.

I was simply stating that whoever the company I called
to help me out, had outsourced their tech division.
I don't agree with outsourcing! My apologies if I confused you.

It's a convenience thing. Customer walks in, buys java, opens laptop, and they're done. Securing the network would involve having to give EACH customer a key. Even then, they could come back the next day (or three months in a row) and hang out in the parking lot.

but still...
I'm trying to understand this...the guy was told not to do it,
but persisted...hmmm...well that's pretty arrogant/cocky on his part...
not sure what I think about this...

Apparently he was a sex offender and was surfin' smut in the parking lot.

lock him up if that's true.

It would be absolutely pointless for Coffee chops and bookstores to "secure" their wireless networks because then none of their customers could use it (unless they took the time to hand out / post the decryption keys, in which case it still wouldn't be secure because you could decrypt everyone's data using the posted keys).

That seems like a relatively simple way of making sure only paying customers get to use your service. And while I don't think it good form to hang out in a coffee shop's parking lot for 8 hours a day just to get free wireless, I also don't see how it rises to the level of theft to answer an open call to log on (which is, if i'm not mistaken, what an open network essentially is).

exactly what you just said. Sounds like a plan. (I'm not a techie..but sounds
pretty good)

1) Is bandwidth, in this specific case, rivalrous or non-rivalrous? That is, does the parking lot man using the bandwidth deprive customer users of bandwidth? If the answer is no, then all the analogies about stealing something out of an open garage, etc., are just wrong, as an economic matter. If I steal spray paint out of your open garage, you no longer have the spray paint, and I do. That's a rivalrous good. If parking lot man "steals" bandwidth, and it doesn't affect the customers' use of the wireless network, or if any effect thereof is imperceptible, then that's a different thing altogether.

2) Given the amount of bandwidth the shop purchased, would one extra non-customer user require the shop to get more bandwidth? How about n non-customer users? I'd say probably for n, but now we're talking theoretically (the physical range of the network would limit the number of non-customer users in any case). But for one? Did this non-customer user actually deprive the shop of anything? Not in principle now, O Dogmatic Capitalist Reader, but in practice (which is to say, again, actually?

Point here: goods like "bandwidth" are only with great trouble and contortions compared to physical goods, like our missing spray paint. In most cases, I'm willing to bet, and I hope our techies help out here, they function as non-rivalrous goods in practice. Falling back on the industrial system of production and its focus on physical commodities leads one into quite a bit of trouble when evaluating such goods. I think everyone should go read Lawrence Lessig's Free Culture or Yochai Benkler's economic analysis of the same phenomenon The Wealth of Networks before they go all half-cocked mouthing the same tired slogans of the the old property. We might even learn soemthing.

no one upstream has been honest abt the situation i have, which is where an unknown party has been placing their service in my house for months, at least since katrina, and perhaps before then but i didn't know to look for it because i didn't own a computer that could pick up wireless

clearly i'm taking NOTHING from them by using the service they have placed in MY house

What if everyone did it? So, what he did was ok because 10 or 100 people didn't do it at the same time?

You approach that point but then dismiss it.

Taking one penny from me wouldn't make a dent, but if enough people stole just one penny from me, it would.

:)

You can use your pet's name as the secret password to get access to your account.
That way your infinitely replenishing bowl of 100 pennies per second is not pilfered by would-be roving penny thieves...

again, the argument makes no sense

they are putting the service into a parking lot, they are putting the service INTO MY HOUSE

i am sorry but you put something in my house and i don't know who you are and can't find out then it's mine, dude

Look, it's in THEIR house, and since the signal doesn't understand walls, you can SEE it from your house. If you can see their TV from your living room window does that make it your goddamn TV? The signal can only go so far, not more than a couple of houses. Do the right thing and help the person who doesn't understand how to secure their network.

You would be deprived of the penny, even one.

I buy the argument below that it is the ISPs that are being harmed, since the parking lot man would have to purchase the service separately from them if he wasn't getting it gratis from the shop. But that is not a harm to the shop, is the point. As to 10 or 100, I don't dismiss the point. I'm asking: how many people using the shop's wireless would cause the shop a harm? If it is not possible for enough people to use the bandwidth for the shop to be deprived of bandwidth (there 9is a limit to range and physical space of "freeloaders" who can fit in that space, then I think we have a different kind of question.

Presuming a flat rate for a water bill, if a person filled buckets of water all day, would that be theft? Would it be theft if they were using the water to make a drink product they were selling, so they didn't have to pay the water bill themselves? I don't know, I'm just trying to connect the use of wireless to something that we're more familiar with. Maybe trespassing was the better charge.

It depends on how the the wireless access point connected to the internet, and how the ISP service agreement was structured. I'd bet that the cafe's contract is set up as a flat rate for a certain guaranteed service rate in bits per second, with a higher limit on download than upload rates.

So unlike a water hose, where you pay a flat rate for any flow, the cafe owner pays the same rate for any utilization up to the limit the ISP has set. So in theory there's no harm done except for the fact that the cafe owner only wants paying customers to use the wireless access point.

Now the bottom line is the store can set whatever policy they want, but it's like putting a no drinking sign up around a natural spring. If you want to guard something even from "petty non-harmful" leechers then by all means secure it.

I too think that the trespassing is the more substantial crime in this case.

yeah, you can steal water from a hose

the crooks next door did it to clean out their house when they didn't have the water service turned on

so i removed the hose and when they used a wrench (!) to steal water from the pipe at the side of my house i got their car license plate and said i would file charges with the police if they did it again

i also put a glue on that pipe so it can no longer be used to draw water

the wireless thing is different, i am not costing whoever is putting the wireless in my living room or in the parking lots ONE TINY DIME, they pay the same whether i use it or not

however my water bill is based on water used -- and worse, i am charged on sewer garbage pick-up based on water used, it just happens to be a rough measure they use here rather than trying to actually weigh our garbage and sewer!

Did you just leap over that part to make your point or what??

A while ago you posted something about people being a nuisance and someone pointed out that you have a tendency to view people that way. I can see that. You literally wouldn't let people borrow your damned hose. Good grief. Lighten the fuck up. My water is on a meter too and I'm not even that big a bitch. Gads.

And no, there is not always an endless supply of bandwidth, it can be metered too.

in my area water is metered by how much you use, and not only that, you are also charged on that basis for garbage pick-up and sewer based on how much water you use

i think i am the only person in this thread who
1) has had water stolen from her property AND
2) has unknown persons providing wireless internet service to her house

so that i think my perspective is worth having even if it doesn't go along to get along with the popular belief

by the way, calling people a bee-word is probably not within the terms and conditions, but you are doing it

should you be arrested?

i seriously doubt it!!!

if there was name-calling in another thread, alert the mods don't tell me, there's nothing i can do about it...if i see someone call you names in another thread i'll do the same, deal?

In that I can be a pretty big bitch - whatever terminology you would like to put on unfriendly behavior is entirely up to you.

A parking lot is not a house.

Yes sometimes water is charged based on the water metered and the sewer metered. Mine is like that. But sometimes it is not, it is one flat rate to everybody, I have had water charged that way too. When someone proposes a scenario, if you're going to respond, you need to stick with the scenario proposed unless there is something wildly inaccurate about it. Otherwise it's just a pointless discussion. If water is one rate no matter how much water you use, can somebody actually steal water from you. I don't think so. They can trespass on your property, but not steal water.

You're also probably not the only person who has ever had someone use your water hose, you just may well be the only person who classifies it as stealing.

since i know another man whose water was stolen to clean out a house which tripled his water bill and he sued to get the money back

and that is just in my neighborhood

trust me, there are scummy landlords everywhere who think they should pay nothing and the real homeowners should pay everything, good luck w. that attitude in front of a jury when most of the homeowners are owners and not renting out the place...

in any event, the wireless internet service has been placed in my house by unknown persons, and i honestly think the only reason it upsets most people is because they are wondering why no free internet has been placed in their house by unknown persons

i am sure free items are placed in your house all the time you would never consider using but the rest of us are not so holy, okay

again, no one has addressed the issue of why i can't use something placed in my own home, if they don't want me to use it, do what cable teevee does and scramble it for crap's sake, it's pretty simple really

Cheers.

It's more like n * p.

Let n=number of users
Let p=megabytes of porn per second. :evilgrin:

What if a freeloader takes all the cafe's capacity over with a bit torrent client?

It's a service, and not a good. Isnt this the same argument to be made for stealing cable?
presumably the harm done is to the ISP that is not getting your service, and is forced to route your freeloading bits.

Because it just floated in the air and we own the airwaves and have a right to access whatever is in the airwaves. I'd guess that would be true of wifi too. They scrambled the television though, so when you use devices to descramble, you somehow become guilty of theft of service. I don't really know how that translates to open wifi, or whether law has gone past the scrambling aspect of tv.

No?

That is my question, with respect to capacity: is there a harm when it comes to capacity? What would our parking lot man have to do to actually deprive the shop of enough bandwidth to noticably degrade the connection for the shop or its customers? I haven't seen that answered. But again, I'm just asking. I don't know. What I'm trying to figure out is whether the "service" functions as rivalrous or non-rivalrous in practice.

I can see the argument that the ISP is being deprived of n more customers through these practices (barely), but I can't see the argument that the shop is being deprived of anything barring some demonstration of that.

That's about as petty as it gets. Could the cops go back to catching terrorists out there?

It's a free service, but it's provided to customers... so he's a total asshole for stealing the signal that they pay for.. for their customers. Having said that.. would they have someone arrested for using their bathroom for months without buying any coffee????? Same damn thing.. an amenity provided for free for their customers, that could be easily used by others.

If you have a business in the food-industry that serves some minimum number of customers then you have to also have a restroom.

Not that it matters. I don't even know why I posted this. I should soooo be in bed.

In Britain, some places certainly put up signs saying bathrooms are for customers only - and I've seen a few where you have to ask for a key. Whether or not that's really enforceable by law, I'm not sure. I think the analogy is roughly right - wireless and a bathroom are a facility which need some capital spending, some money to maintain them, but you may say any single use of them may not affect the customers who have paid the business.

I don't think the 'use of radio frequencies should be free' argument some poeple here have deployed is relevant - it's not the frequencies, but he use of the router and broadband connection that's the problem.

IMO his real crime was that he tresspassed after he was told to leave, not that he used an unsecured wireless connection.

I can understand why they wouldn't want dozens of people loitering in their parking lot using their wireless. That being said, if you don't secure your network, you're asking for it to do.

and then getting mad that someone gets the damn thing on their TV w/o paying them. idiotic.

encrypt the damn thing or shut the hell up.

hell if they wanna do one better, get a weaker wifi transmitter so the damn signal is confined to the damn building and not the freakin' parking lot and beyond. i'm dumbfounded at some of the powerful equipment they put in some places -- did you really need to broadcast that stuff clear across the block and into grandma's panties? stupid.

won't mind if the Government listens to their cell phone calls since you're broadcasting the signal into their black van.

the trouble of having to prosecute him.

I appreciate that the coffee house has a propriety interest here(they have to pay for the traffic on their system and if they want to limit its use to people who have to come inside, that's fair).

But, I don't like the government having to spend thousands of dollars in time and effort having to put this guy through the system when it could have taken the coffee shop five minutes to take care of this themselves.

Far easier to depend on the government to charge someone a fine or throw them in jail than to learn how to set up your router correctly. Heaven forbid you set up your router so that it isn't saying "Go ahead and use me" if you don't want it used.

He's at the least cheap and inconsiderate.