Ethical to "borrow" neighbor's internet access?

[cmwck]

I just moved into a new apartment, and of the 10 wireless access points around me, about 5 are completely open (no WEP), and most of them are using the default ssid.

Is it OK to connect to one of these for web access, as long as I don't use up a ton of bandwidth , or do anything illegal, like look at child porn in OOT? It is unlikely that any of the access points' owners would even be aware of my presence.

Doing this would save me about 35 bucks/month on basic DSL service.

[invictus33]

That's like asking if you should give a fish his money back after a session. If they don't know how to secure their wireless connection then that is their choice. Besides, now when you do anything illegal it comes back to them!

[Benholio]

The morality of 'borrowing' unsecured wireless connections is a topic of much debate these days, but at least one person has been arrested for it (http://informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=165700406) in Florida.

Personally, I wouldn't want to rely on my neighbors as my primary internet connection, but I'm not above using their connections temporarily if mine goes down.

[EliteNinja]

Go for it.
Is it against the law?

[jnalpak]

i believe wired magazine ran an article talking about this and that it actually is ILLEGAL to do.

good luck

[CaptSensible]

I think it's perfectly fine if as you said you dont use up too much bandwith and you don't do anything illeagle. If I had a wireless network at my house and didn't want anyone using it i'd make it secure.

It seems odd that someone would have the knowledge to set up a wireless network but not be aware that they sould make it secure if they dont want other people using it.

[TimM]

[ QUOTE ]
The morality of 'borrowing' unsecured wireless connections is a topic of much debate these days, but at least one person has been arrested for it (http://informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=165700406) in Florida.

[/ QUOTE ]

"arrest on charges of unauthorized access to a computer network"

This is pretty ridiculous. If his wireless network is completely open and not secured in any way, who is to say it's unauthorized?

[cmwck]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The morality of 'borrowing' unsecured wireless connections is a topic of much debate these days, but at least one person has been arrested for it (http://informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=165700406) in Florida.

[/ QUOTE ]

"arrest on charges of unauthorized access to a computer network"

This is pretty ridiculous. If his wireless network is completely open and not secured in any way, who is to say it's unauthorized?

[/ QUOTE ]

Didn't the guy in that story use the wireless network to hack into some other network (i.e. something illegal)

[cmwck]

[ QUOTE ]
i believe wired magazine ran an article talking about this and that it actually is ILLEGAL to do.

good luck

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you have a link to the article?

[blendedsuit]

It is illegal unfortunately. The likelyhood of you getting caught? <0.02%

[kenberman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The morality of 'borrowing' unsecured wireless connections is a topic of much debate these days, but at least one person has been arrested for it (http://informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=165700406) in Florida.

[/ QUOTE ]

"arrest on charges of unauthorized access to a computer network"

This is pretty ridiculous. If his wireless network is completely open and not secured in any way, who is to say it's unauthorized?

[/ QUOTE ]

if your neighbors front door is wide open, is it ok for you to walk into his house and eat his food?

[CaptSensible]

[ QUOTE ]
It is illegal unfortunately. The likelyhood of you getting caught? <0.02%

[/ QUOTE ]

Does that make it +EV?

[RunDownHouse]

No, its not ethical.

[TheIrishThug]

[ QUOTE ]
if your neighbors front door is wide open, is it ok for you to walk into his house and eat his food?

[/ QUOTE ]

couldn't have said it better myself.

[Paluka]

That guy only got himself arrested because he was sitting in his car in front of their house, which is creepy.

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
if your neighbors front door is wide open, is it ok for you to walk into his house and eat his food?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not at all the same. If his food came floating into my house, then yes I would eat it.

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
No, its not ethical.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. We're talking about the use of something that has come onto my property, into my house, etc. Hell it's permeating my body for Christ sake! And you're talling me it's unethical of me to use it? That's absurd.

[BeerMoney]

Look at it this way.. If neighbor's a nit, he'd be uptight about it.. If he's laidback, he'd probably say "nice work." I guess the service provider wouldn't like it though..

I think this is one of those things that technically is wrong, but no one's gonna view you any differently for it.

[crownjules]

[ QUOTE ]
It seems odd that someone would have the knowledge to set up a wireless network but not be aware that they sould make it secure if they dont want other people using it.

[/ QUOTE ]

The knowledge is fairly basic. All you need to do is buy a wireless router and plug it in to your connection point. Voila! Most people don't read instructions and therefore don't know about encryption.

[RunDownHouse]

Is it ethical to listen to your neighbors' cell phone conversations?

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
Is it ethical to listen to your neighbors' cell phone conversations?

[/ QUOTE ]

I assume you mean if he's using an unsecured cordless that I can pick up the signal in my house? Then I see nothing unethical about it. I don't know why I'd want to do it though.

[RunDownHouse]

Or how about this: if the neighbor knew, would he allow you to continue without paying?

Why doesn't the OP just tell his neighbors, if its all fine and dandy?

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
Or how about this: if the neighbor knew, would he allow you to continue without paying?

Why doesn't the OP just tell his neighbors, if its all fine and dandy?

[/ QUOTE ]

Legal and ethical are not the same thing.

[TheIrishThug]

jake, y do u have a cake again. didn't u just have it last month?

[RunDownHouse]

Are you suggesting the neighbors would have no ethical problem with him freeriding on their internet, but would take legal action in order to uphold the law?

What if the OP went out to their cable box and spliced some cables together or whatever and gained access to their cable signal. Also ethical?

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
Are you suggesting the neighbors would have no ethical problem with him freeriding on their internet, but would take legal action in order to uphold the law?

What if the OP went out to their cable box and spliced some cables together or whatever and gained access to their cable signal. Also ethical?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. I'm suggesting that I don't care whether the neighbors consider it ethical. I do. I won't tell them because they may or may not consider it ethical, and may take legal action.

In my view, the cable issue is entirely different. There is typically a utility easement. The cable is not my property. I won't go cut into a cable that doesn't belong to me. The wireless signal comes right into my house whether I want it to or not.

[RunDownHouse]

[ QUOTE ]
The cable is not my property. I won't go cut into a cable that doesn't belong to me. The wireless signal comes right into my house whether I want it to or not.

[/ QUOTE ]
That seems like a pretty fine line, Jake. Just because something is intangible doesn't mean that it isn't someone's property. If a coffee shop had unsecured wireless, and asked patrons to be on the honor system when it came to use, I don't think it would be ethical - regardless of legality - to use it, even if you lived above the shop and it came into your house.

I didn't take any philosophy or ethics courses in college, so I'm not real eloquent when it comes to these types of things.

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
That seems like a pretty fine line, Jake. Just because something is intangible doesn't mean that it isn't someone's property. If a coffee shop had unsecured wireless, and asked patrons to be on the honor system when it came to use, I don't think it would be ethical - regardless of legality - to use it, even if you lived above the shop and it came into your house.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well we can just disagree on this. In my mind, it's pretty clear.

[HopeydaFish]

You're using his bandwidth. His service will be slower as a result. He's paying $35/month for all of the bandwidth available to him, and is not paying this money to share his bandwidth with the rest of the building. The fact that he didn't secure his base station doesn't make it all right to steal from him. He probably doesn't realize that there are people out there who will leech off his service, and/or he doesn't know how to secure his base station. The fact that he's not informed does not make it alright to take advantage of him.

That being said, you're obviously going to go do it anyway. Questiong whether it is "ethical" is laughable, though. You can twist the situation as much as you want, but you'll never make it sound ethical. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[swede123]

Of course it's illegal. When you sign the agreement with the cable/DSL provider you state that you are only using the service for yourself. It's not like it's the crime of the century, you most likely won't end up in federal-pound-me-in-the-ass prison, but it's definitely against the law.

Swede

[RunDownHouse]

[ QUOTE ]
Legal and ethical are not the same thing.

[/ QUOTE ]

[CaptSensible]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if your neighbors front door is wide open, is it ok for you to walk into his house and eat his food?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not at all the same. If his food came floating into my house, then yes I would eat it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I had just taken a sip of water when I read this. I laughed so hard I spit it out!

[CaptSensible]

[quote
I didn't take any philosophy or ethics courses in college, so I'm not real eloquent when it comes to these types of things.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought your analogy was a good one /images/graemlins/smile.gif And I agree, it would not be ethical

[webmonarch]

Here is how I think about this as a recent law grad. I AM NOT A LICENSED LAWYER AT THIS POINT. THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE.

In law, we have various property rights and duties. We have the right to proptect our property, and we also have the right to not do anything about it.

For example, if a property owner knows that kids cross over his property as a shortcut to school every day and he does nothing about it then the kids will not be considered to be trespassers because the conduct is known to the owner, and the owner has more or less chosen to waive his property rights.

Now, that doesn't mean that the owner owes the kids any duty (unless he has some known deathtrap on his property). If the kid falls on his property and skins his knee that kid has zero right to sue the owner.

In cases such as this, an unsecured wireless connection is to me, a simple waiver of trespass. The owner of the connection needs to protect his property rights from a foreseeable nuisance, which is what freeriders would be.

In this case, the burden is virtually nothing to protect. There is virtualy no cost. The owner simply has to read an instruction booklet to prevent unauthorizes users from being on their property.

Now, if you do something criminal while on the connection (e.g. online gambling, in some states) that's going to be a very different story, and the owner can press criminal and civil charges (what damages he would have, I have no clue) but he could still bring them.

As for the whole "unauthorized access" thing, I think that any item that actually permeates your home, and you have to do nothing more than simply turn on your computer does not qualify as an "unauthorized" access.

As for illegality, I know of no other FEDERAL statute that would apply, except for the following:

Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), 18 U.S.C.S. § 2501 et seq.

State laws may be more stringent, but I doubt that there is any liability under the ECPA.

I don't really reach the ethics of it all here, but that's my take on the legality.

Post deleted by ManyBeers

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]

Scenario: I am sitting in my living room and turn on my computer and it's wireless software detects a signal from my neighbors wireless router, Does that signal have a right to be on my property?

[/ QUOTE ]

What a strange thing to say. Are you also planning on suing radio stations, broadcast television, power companies and the sun for their infringing on your property with electromagnetic radiation?

[Tron]

[ QUOTE ]
Post deleted by ManyBeers

[/ QUOTE ]

Bwahahaha too late

[gumpzilla]

I think it's pretty clearly unethical; that said, I frequently do it myself when the wireless access that I'm paying somebody in my apartment to share with craps out.

As to why I think it's unethical, you're freeloading off of somebody else for a service that you'd be willing to pay for yourself. I think the best solution is to talk to the person whose wireless you're leeching off of and offer to split the bill with them. Then you save some money and everything is kosher.

[trying2learn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Post deleted by ManyBeers

[/ QUOTE ]

Bwahahaha too late

[/ QUOTE ]

comedy...

I think people who are broadcasting a wireless signal are responsible for securing said signal. After all if your signal has entered the airspace of my computer on my property I have the right to use that signal ...I think but I'm not sure. And this is how I arrived at the poll question:

Lets suppose for some reason I am allergic to the radio wave frequencies generated by modern Wi-Fi equipment(these are man-made frequencies and do not occur normally in nature..I thiink but you get the point) does your routers signal have a right to be on my property?,and possibly affecting my well being adversely?

[RacersEdge]

Definitely unethical, and probably illegal.



Why does something being intangible confuse so many people?

[ QUOTE ]
Definitely unethical, and probably illegal.



Why does something being intangible confuse so many people?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't thin man-made radio waves would qualify as an "intangible", if that is what you are referring to. Not trying to be a dick here either.

[Bulldog]

If you have to ask...

[1800GAMBLER]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if your neighbors front door is wide open, is it ok for you to walk into his house and eat his food?

[/ QUOTE ]

couldn't have said it better myself.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, you could have. You could have thought up analogy that works.

[CaptSensible]

Personaly I think this has been a great topic. Ethics debates are always interesting. At any rate after reading many well stated posts I'm changing my stance from, "Sure no big deal, He should have secured his line" to:

I think it's completely unethical to use his signal. I still don't think it's a big deal if you do. There won't be much damage from this kind of behaviour. He probably won't even notice at all unless you plan on downloading lots of large files. IF he plays online games He'll notice.
If you play online games he'll notice.


Anyhow, the poster who said "why don't you offer to split the bill with him" has the best idea. The reality of that might be trickier than on paper for a number of reasons I won't go into.

If I were the neighbor I'd probably say "i'm fine with you using it as long as I don't notice that you're using it."

I'd want your phone number so if i'm doing something bandwith intensive I could call you up and tell ya to get off.

I do have neighbors that have unsecured wi-fi. I've only used it a couple times like when my own connection wasnt working and I needed to get something on the web real quick.

I wouldn't care if someone used my wi-fi for the same reasons.

In my opinion you're better off, in the long run, getting your own hi speed connection. If you get wi-fi, make sure you secure it /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[HopeydaFish]

[ QUOTE ]

Lets suppose for some reason I am allergic to the radio wave frequencies

[/ QUOTE ]

At least he's not claiming that the radio waves are "stealing his thoughts".

Show me someone who thinks he is allergic to radio waves and I'll show you a person who has serious psychological issues.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]
I think people who are broadcasting a wireless signal are responsible for securing said signal. After all if your signal has entered the airspace of my computer on my property I have the right to use that signal ...I think but I'm not sure.

[/ QUOTE ]

Must I taunt you a second time?

An airplane flies over your home. Is it invading your property? If so, are you allowed to take over and use the airplane for your own benefit?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Lets suppose for some reason I am allergic to the radio wave frequencies

[/ QUOTE ]

At least he's not claiming that the radio waves are "stealing his thoughts".

Show me someone who thinks he is allergic to radio waves and I'll show you a person who has serious psychological issues.

[/ QUOTE ]

Apparently you just flat don't like me, thats OK this is a public forum and it is your right to insult at will. Keep em coming.

I nfact If you had insulted some of the posters on here like you have me they would have reduced you to "Ignored" a long time ago, however, I don't use that feature so I will just have to tough it out.

[FoxwoodsFiend]

[ QUOTE ]
I just moved into a new apartment, and of the 10 wireless access points around me, about 5 are completely open (no WEP), and most of them are using the default ssid.

Is it OK to connect to one of these for web access, as long as I don't use up a ton of bandwidth , or do anything illegal, like look at child porn in OOT? It is unlikely that any of the access points' owners would even be aware of my presence.

Doing this would save me about 35 bucks/month on basic DSL service.

[/ QUOTE ]

As a utilitarian, I would find it highly objectionable if you DON'T steal internet access.

[FoxwoodsFiend]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if your neighbors front door is wide open, is it ok for you to walk into his house and eat his food?

[/ QUOTE ]

couldn't have said it better myself.

[/ QUOTE ]

You guys cannot possibly think this is a good analogy-you'd have to add "and the guy had practically unlimited amounts of food and would never notice." Seriously, stealing food harms the guy. Slowing down his internet barely affects the guy at all.

[gumpzilla]

You're right, it doesn't matter at all. So why don't you be the guy that pays $35 a month and let everybody else freeload off of you?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Lets suppose for some reason I am allergic to the radio wave frequencies

[/ QUOTE ]

At least he's not claiming that the radio waves are "stealing his thoughts".

Show me someone who thinks he is allergic to radio waves and I'll show you a person who has serious psychological issues.

[/ QUOTE ]

Apparently you just flat don't like me, thats OK this is a public forum and it is your right to insult at will. Keep em coming.

I nfact If you had insulted some of the posters on here like you have me they would have reduced you to "Ignored" a long time ago, however, I don't use that feature so I will just have to tough it out.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just ignore him. He obviously doesn't appreciate what a shrewd businessman you are.

So when can I expect my $4500 cheque, my friend?

[cmwck]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the best solution is to talk to the person whose wireless you're leeching off of and offer to split the bill with them. Then you save some money and everything is kosher.

[/ QUOTE ]

There's no easy way to tell where these wireless signals are coming from. It's not like I can only pick up one access point, I can pick up at least 6, and all of them are unsecured. They're also coming in at low signal strength, so they could be coming from anywhere inside the building

[CaptSensible]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the best solution is to talk to the person whose wireless you're leeching off of and offer to split the bill with them. Then you save some money and everything is kosher.

[/ QUOTE ]

There's no easy way to tell where these wireless signals are coming from. It's not like I can only pick up one access point, I can pick up at least 6, and all of them are unsecured. They're also coming in at low signal strength, so they could be coming from anywhere inside the building

[/ QUOTE ]

This changes EVERYTHING! just take turns leeching from all the nits that don't care about/don't know about securing their network. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[cmwck]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the best solution is to talk to the person whose wireless you're leeching off of and offer to split the bill with them. Then you save some money and everything is kosher.

[/ QUOTE ]

There's no easy way to tell where these wireless signals are coming from. It's not like I can only pick up one access point, I can pick up at least 6, and all of them are unsecured. They're also coming in at low signal strength, so they could be coming from anywhere inside the building

[/ QUOTE ]

This changes EVERYTHING! just take turns leeching from all the nits that don't care about/don't know about securing their network. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

This reminds me about something. When I switched ISPs a few months ago, Empire froze my account because they saw the same username logging in from two different IP addresses over the course of a day. They unfroze my once I sent them proof of identity.

If I round-robin among 4 or 5 APs, that's 4 or 5 IP address that the poker sites will see me using over the course of a day, and my account could be flagged. Anyone know if the other sites besides Empire care about what IP address you're coming from?

[siccjay]

Not bad, I wish I would have done this sooner. It would have been better when he was really heated.

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
Definitely unethical, and probably illegal. Why does something being intangible confuse so many people?

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree completely. It has nothing to do with tangible or intangible. I'm very clear in my belief that theft of intellectual property is unethical. However, in my mind, using something that exists in my own house is clearly ethical.

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
An airplane flies over your home. Is it invading your property? If so, are you allowed to take over and use the airplane for your own benefit?

[/ QUOTE ]

If it flies into my house then yes.

[otctrader]

Ethical debate put aside, if your neighboor is a nit and somehow suspects you of stealing his/her access, how would authorities prove it?

The case in Florida is some bonehead who was caught by the homeowner sitting outside his house with a laptop in clear view and was caught in the act multiple times.

If you're in the comfort of your apartment, and don't login to anything that identifies you (if you're being logged), even if your neighbor captures your MAC id, what can the authorities do? It's not registered to you.

[RunDownHouse]

[ QUOTE ]
Ethical debate put aside

[/ QUOTE ]
I think you're missing the point of the thread.

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
The case in Florida is some bonehead who was caught by the homeowner sitting outside his house with a laptop in clear view and was caught in the act multiple times.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's ridiculous. I sit outside using my laptop all the time. Frequently I'm doing work and not online at all.

[otctrader]

I should rephrase... when I say "his" house I'm referring to the guy with the router (the perp was sitting in his car parked outside the homeowner's front lawn, and scurried away the first time when confronted).

Even this brings up a good question - say the homeowner calls the cops, and you're in your car parked on his curb reading 2+2 (on his router). Assuming you're not displaying some vulgar pictures in clear view for everyone to see, do they have any grounds to stop you from sitting there and/or accuse you of stealing his net access?

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
I should rephrase... when I say "his" house I'm referring to the guy with the router (the perp was sitting in his car parked outside the homeowner's front lawn, and scurried away the first time when confronted).

Even this brings up a good question - say the homeowner calls the cops, and you're in your car parked on his curb reading 2+2 (on his router). Assuming you're not displaying some vulgar pictures in clear view for everyone to see, do they have any grounds to stop you from sitting there and/or accuse you of stealing his net access?

[/ QUOTE ]

The funny thing about this is that peoiple go to this much trouble. Even if I were one of these cheapskates, I'd rather just pay for wireless internet than drive around looking for it to surf in my car. /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[otctrader]

[ QUOTE ]
The funny thing about this is that peoiple go to this much trouble. Even if I were one of these cheapskates, I'd rather just pay for wireless internet than drive around looking for it to surf in my car.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well I think from the authorities' standpoint the fear is guys will drive up to a WAP and sniff packets for credit card numbers and personal info. If you go into unsecure routers you'll also come across individuals who have full Windows sharing on allowing anyone to upload trojans, keyloggers, etc...

[astroglide]

i wouldn't worry about the legality of it, i'd worry about the quality. if you're in an apartment with that many signals (and no doubt microwave ovens and 2.4ghz phones) you WILL experience frequent droppage because of all of the conflicts. you'll still need a firewall (xp sp2) to protect yourself from anybody else on the network, and you'll have to find satisfaction in saving money to have an unreliable connection. playing poker over said connection would most likely be idiotic. yahoo dsl is like $15/month.

[dcasper70]

CNN finds this interesting... (http://money.cnn.com/2005/08/08/technology/personaltech/internet_piracy/index.htm?cnn=yes)

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
An airplane flies over your home. Is it invading your property? If so, are you allowed to take over and use the airplane for your own benefit?

[/ QUOTE ]

If it flies into my house then yes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly

[gumpzilla]

Hmm. Why don't you sue every living creature for five miles around for depositing poisonous CO2 molecules inside of your house, as well?

I really think this line of "well, it's in my house" is not sensible here. As others have pointed out, by this rationale you are perfectly within your rights to eavesdrop on conversations on signals that go through your house, which is obviously ridiculous.

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
Hmm. Why don't you sue every living creature for five miles around for depositing poisonous CO2 molecules inside of your house, as well?

I really think this line of "well, it's in my house" is not sensible here. As others have pointed out, by this rationale you are perfectly within your rights to eavesdrop on conversations on signals that go through your house, which is obviously ridiculous.

[/ QUOTE ]

No. It's not. It's perfectly reasonable. Why is it ridiculous?

[HopeydaFish]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hmm. Why don't you sue every living creature for five miles around for depositing poisonous CO2 molecules inside of your house, as well?

I really think this line of "well, it's in my house" is not sensible here. As others have pointed out, by this rationale you are perfectly within your rights to eavesdrop on conversations on signals that go through your house, which is obviously ridiculous.

[/ QUOTE ]

No. It's not. It's perfectly reasonable. Why is it ridiculous?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I'm getting really sick and tired of my neighbour's trees producing oxygen that is wafting into my yard. It's really pissing me off. Do you think I should sue?

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I'm getting really sick and tired of my neighbour's trees producing oxygen that is wafting into my yard. It's really pissing me off. Do you think I should sue?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a really stupid and backward post. You're better than that. Your argument is backward because it's he that has the problem in the wi fi case, and would be doing the sueing. I haven't seen one single solid argument as to why use of neighbor's wi fi is unethical. But using your above argument, I do breathe the oxygen his trees produce when it comes floating right into my nostrils.

[HopeydaFish]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I'm getting really sick and tired of my neighbour's trees producing oxygen that is wafting into my yard. It's really pissing me off. Do you think I should sue?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a really stupid and backward post. You're better than that. Your argument is backward because it's he that has the problem in the wi fi case, and would be doing the sueing. I haven't seen one single solid argument as to why use of neighbor's wi fi is unethical. But using your above argument, I do breathe the oxygen his trees produce when it comes floating right into my nostrils.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, I misread your post. I thought you were being sarcastic in response to the previous poster making mention of "poisonous CO2" being produced by the neighbours' animals. I missed the fact that you were actually responding to the WiFi part of his post.

My only ethical concern about using my neighbour's WiFi is the fact that I'll be reducing the bandwidth available to my neighbour, and he's paying for this bandwidth, I'm not. I'm being a leech.

If enough people were to use his WiFi, his connection speed would come to a crawl. Even if he isn't tech-savvy enough to protect his connection, this is still not a reason to take advantage of him.

Now, if there was some way to know when he was online so that I could avoid going online at those times (and not reduce his bandwidth), then your behaviour is victimless. Using his WiFi while he's out of town on vacation would be an example of how this could happen.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]

Now, if there was some way to know when he was online so that I could avoid going online at those times (and not reduce his bandwidth), then your behaviour is victimless.

[/ QUOTE ]

Breaking into somebody's house while they're on vacation so you can use their massive plasma TV would be "victimless" too, in this sense, but I think that we can all agree that that's pretty wrong.

As I mentioned earlier, would you want to be the guy shelling out $ each month for internet access and then being freeloaded off of? For most people the answer is no. Thus, I think this is a pretty strong indicator that the activity in question is unethical. The Golden Rule works pretty good.

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Now, if there was some way to know when he was online so that I could avoid going online at those times (and not reduce his bandwidth), then your behaviour is victimless.

[/ QUOTE ]

Breaking into somebody's house while they're on vacation so you can use their massive plasma TV would be "victimless" too, in this sense, but I think that we can all agree that that's pretty wrong.

As I mentioned earlier, would you want to be the guy shelling out $ each month for internet access and then being freeloaded off of? For most people the answer is no. Thus, I think this is a pretty strong indicator that the activity in question is unethical. The Golden Rule works pretty good.

[/ QUOTE ]

Would I want to be mooched off of? Maybe not. If that's the case, then i would take steps to prevent it. Would i want someone listening to my phone calls? no. But i don't think it's unethical for them to do so. Just because I don't like something someone does, does not mean it's unethical. the golden rule is good, and i generally follow it. But that doesn't mean i belive i have an ethical obligation to do so.

[HopeydaFish]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Now, if there was some way to know when he was online so that I could avoid going online at those times (and not reduce his bandwidth), then your behaviour is victimless.

[/ QUOTE ]

Breaking into somebody's house while they're on vacation so you can use their massive plasma TV would be "victimless" too, in this sense, but I think that we can all agree that that's pretty wrong.

As I mentioned earlier, would you want to be the guy shelling out $ each month for internet access and then being freeloaded off of? For most people the answer is no. Thus, I think this is a pretty strong indicator that the activity in question is unethical. The Golden Rule works pretty good.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's the problem with this argument -- it's hard to use an anology to compare with using someone else's WiFi access. Your analogy of breaking into someone's house doesn't really fit because it involves violating someone's privacy by physically trespassing on their property. Having a stranger in your house while you're on vacation is more obtrusive than having someone use your WiFi during the same period.

The WiFi signal is entering your home and coming to you. It requires no physical trespassing on your part.

I'm not saying that leeching off someone's WiFi is ethical. Clearly I don't think it is. However, in some instances it might be less unethical than in others (though still unethical nonetheless).

[HopeydaFish]

I guess it depends on whether you consider stealing to be unethical, and whether you consider mooching WiFi to be stealing. If you don't consider mooching WiFi to be stealing, then it follows that you wouldn't consider it to be unethical.

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
I guess it depends on whether you consider stealing to be unethical, and whether you consider mooching WiFi to be stealing. If you don't consider mooching WiFi to be stealing, then it follows that you wouldn't consider it to be unethical.

[/ QUOTE ]

In my opinion, yes, stealing is unethical. No mooching wifi is not stealing.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hmm. Why don't you sue every living creature for five miles around for depositing poisonous CO2 molecules inside of your house, as well?

I really think this line of "well, it's in my house" is not sensible here. As others have pointed out, by this rationale you are perfectly within your rights to eavesdrop on conversations on signals that go through your house, which is obviously ridiculous.

[/ QUOTE ]

No. It's not. It's perfectly reasonable. Why is it ridiculous?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I'm getting really sick and tired of my neighbour's trees producing oxygen that is wafting into my yard. It's really pissing me off. Do you think I should sue?

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand what your saying but Wifi signals are" man made signals" which I believe is quite different then natural biological processes produced in nature. Do you agree?

[bwana devil]

Post deleted by bwana devil

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
cnn (http://money.cnn.com/2005/08/08/technology/personaltech/internet_piracy/index.htm?cnn=yes)

has this been posted in this thread? havent read all of the replies.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. And it's still irrelevant.