Maryland turns against Wi-Fi leeching laws

Wed Apr 16, 2008 12:00PM EDT

See Comments (42)

I've discussed, with many of you here and offline, the complicated legal and moral debate surrounding so-called Wi-Fi leeching, or the use of another person's wireless signal without permission. While many see borrowing someone else's openly broadcast wireless signal as a crime, others find it a victimless one at worst, amounting to something about as heinous as throwing an apple core into someone else's trash.

The state of Maryland is becoming one of the first states, if not the first state, to side with the latter viewpoint. Its state Judiciary Committee has reported "unfavorably" on a bill that would officially criminalize Wi-Fi hitchhiking, subjecting violators to punishments ranging from a $1,000 fine to three years in jail. If the access point is password-protected, the punishments could hit $10,000 and ten years in jail. Ten years in the slammer for using another person's router! Yow!

Numerous cases of unauthorized Wi-Fi use have hit the court systems in recent years, with generally low penalties. In Michigan, a man who was using a cafe's Wi-Fi signal from his car was ultimately fined $400 and given 40 hours of community service to work off his transgression. (Michigan law allowed for up to a $10,000 fine and five years in prison.) Similar cases have typically resulted in similar sentences, with sub-$1,000 fines and no jail time actually served. But in virtually all of them, the "intruders" are indeed found guilty of some crime in the end.

As a curious side note, Ars Technica notes that the Maryland bill was the brainchild of LeRoy E. Myers, a legislative Delegate who came up with the idea... after a neighbor used his network without permission, because he'd never bothered to set up security for it. His solution was not simply to turn on WPA, but instead to try to write a law to turn his neighbor into a criminal. Epic fail!

Comments on Maryland turns against Wi-Fi leeching laws

Post a Comment

Join in the discussion. Here you'll see the comments in the order they were posted.

  • 26 Posted by thisismyname31 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 10:07PM EDT Report Abuse

    I'm addicted lol.. I admit it.. but I use my metal box to make money, so it's a good thing http://tinyurl.com/2ngp5c (free site to earn some cash)

  • 27 Posted by rico.rommel on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:40PM EDT Report Abuse

    Bah! I turned off encryption for Router. I like sharing my Network.

  • 28 Posted by ron_nelson2002 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:51PM EDT Report Abuse

    If I set up my sprinkler to water my lawn and some of it sprays into my neighbors yard and he catches some in a cup and drinks it should he go to jail? It is my water. I didn%

  • 30 Posted by lcybikini on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:58PM EDT Report Abuse

    I have a WPA key with TKIP enabled but am thinking of turning it off. My broadcast is turned down to avoid this "piggyback" issue but my neighbor's network is stronger and keeps knocking me off my own network if I move a foot or two in my living room. Like vixengal said if they are radiating into my space then I have the right to do with it as I see fit. I think if we are going to jump on people about the Wi-FI issue, make it a crime to not have it secured. If you can't figure out how to set it up find someone who can or you shouldn't own a wireless network, stop complaining.

  • 31 Posted by ron_nelson2002 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:51PM EDT Report Abuse

    If I set up my sprinkler to water my lawn and some of it sprays into my neighbors yard and he catches some in a cup and drinks it should he go to jail? It is my water. I did not say he could drink it. My point is that if I broadcast an unencrypted Wi-Fi signal into my neighborhood I would have to be a moron to expect that nobody would ever use it. Sorry, this is my first post.

  • 32 Posted by cokebear2020@att.net on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:28PM EDT Report Abuse

    Gee o2cmefly I'm a Dem and you might not believe this but my network is secured, so is my house and my tool sheds, ooh lets not forget I even lock the gate to my back yard. Trust me if I catch your butt in my house or perhaps back yard or tool shed I very well may send you to the hospital to have some lead removed from your republican seat cushion. Just because someone doesn't share your political views you make the leap to them being lazy or stupid. You should really take a look in the mirror. I would consider sharing my internet with someone who asks and helps to offset the cost but since I'm the one paying for it I don't want you using it without knowing. This leads to my conclusion that if there is anyone to "blame" then it's the router manufacturers. The router should come out of the box secured. A user should educate themselves enough to be able to use the router, if not then they shouldn't own a computer that is attached to a network that is secure. Then if anyone saw an open network they could reasonably assume that the owner of the network is indeed sharing their access. The router manufacturers however want to sell routers and so ship them unsecured to make sure the user can use it without having to know anything about networking. This is the reason most routers ship with an install disk which many people know has outdated software. ok ok end rant

  • 33 Posted by hongkongkongo on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:20PM EDT Report Abuse

    10 years for stealing an internet? and there are pedophiles only for one or two years in jail. secure the router, just ilke you lock your car or house. whats the harm anyway? well the person could do something illegal on the internet.

  • 34 Posted by mpputman on Thu Sep 3, 2009 7:27PM EDT Report Abuse

    For some reason, these discussions on whether it's OK to "borrow" bandwidth on somebody else's wireless network just catch my attention. Bottom line is that it's against the law. So any argument as to why it's OK to hijack the connection is just somebody trying to justify breaking the law. If you don't like the law, then work to get the law changed. Until then, that's what you are stuck with. Like cokebear2020 said...you aren't helping me to pay for my broadband connection, so stay off of it. And I agree with him 100% in that a huge part of the problem is how easy manufacturers make it to set up an unsecured network. Another thing is that a lot of people argue that since they don't do anything "bad" on the connection, it should be OK to borrow. But where do you draw the line? Is just checking e-mail OK, or is downloading some new music into iTunes OK too? What about streaming video? What about P2P file sharing? At what point do all of you feel it steps over the line with "borrowing" other Internet connections?

  • 35 Posted by gboess82 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:06PM EDT Report Abuse

    Everyone with comments about leaving keys in cars.. that's apples and oranges. It is not an invitation if someone does not secure their network. Some people truly don't know how to encrpyt their wireless, and some don't because they don't want to. Don't you think some don't becasue they know people will sign on to their network and transmit data that they can steal and use against you? I think that an unsecured network is open and anyone should be able to use it, be we can't be so naive and think that the person on the other end is computer illiterate. Open network is open for all. There are too many forums and step-by-step out there to set up encryption NOT to have it, but use at your own risk and expect that there can be consequences through the law and through other users. And if you get onto someone's secured network, then you deserve jail and fine for that. They obviously don't want you there and try to keep people away. That's like locking house door, or car door, and someone breaking in.

  • 37 Posted by seaweedsteve on Thu Sep 3, 2009 9:11PM EDT Report Abuse

    Unsecured wifi is more like an open box of clothes (free box) in the street. Or music that someone is playing in the park. Many times one can assume that it is being offered or shared. How does one determine what is being freely shared vs stealing in this case? I don't use other's internet (security reasons) and I keep ours secured for the same reason. But I believe that the obvious indication for whether it's private or being shared is if it has a lock or not on it. Sorry, but those who don't secure their signal in the public airwaves are offering it for free in my opinion. Ignorance is no excuse. Laws come and go for different reasons and too often serve special interests, not the public good; one must be aware of them and act accordingly to avoid trouble. Morals are another issue and law only roughly follows what is right and wrong. If you find my wifi signal unsecured, please use it, but be considerate. If you try to crack it when secured, you are an intruder and we both know it. Not right. Ideally the laws will come to match this. Oh, and the guy who thinks that the lawmaker in question must be a Democrat, I don't see this attitude as being unusual for Dems or Reps, whom seem quite similar to me anyway. I think that many people have Libertarian ideas, but are lead to believe that they are Republicans (works!). In my experience, Republicans only act libertarian when it comes to big corporations. To the rest of us, they are all about government control, even more than the Dems.

  • 38 Posted by patrick_m_walsh on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:01PM EDT Report Abuse

    All I have to say is, if the people that are in effect broadcasting their free wifi don't like leechers then they can turn on the encryption. If they are either not willing or too lazy to do so then that's on them, just don't whine about it.

  • 39 Posted by whitetyger_us on Thu Sep 3, 2009 10:44PM EDT Report Abuse

    I find this interesting. You set up a wireless network and do not bother to protect it. The you cry when someone uses it. It is no different then locking the door on your house or your car. it is to secure it and diminish the threat of theft. Now I believe that if you are secured and someone hacks and you can prove it they should be held accountable.

  • 40 Posted by fourstar10_2000 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:02PM EDT Report Abuse

    There is a distinct difference between stealing something that doesn't belong to you and utilizing something that is permeating your body. My body is mine... if you don't understand, it is not my fault. Anything... and I mean anything that is beamed, transmitted, bounced onto me or through me is mine. That is the natural law which is above mans law. This includes sunlight, porch-light, radio waves, sound, smells, the noise of crowds etc. I don't claim to own the source of the transmission, but once it invades my body, it is mine and it is my choice what I do with it. Those that transmit know this and will do anything to convince you that what they beam into you is theirs. If I smell something someone is cooking, I don't own the food but I certainly own the molecules entering my nose. I don't own the streetlights, but i can use them to read by. I don't own radio stations, but I can listen to any station I want if I have the equipment and wifi is radio. So, if I can decode any radio frequency, like deciphering a foreign language... it is mine... If the owners have a complaint... too bad... stop beaming your stuff through my body. By the way... the government doesn't have a problem eaves dropping on you! Smarten up people and don't let the propaganda rule your intelligence. I have to put up with nearly the entire radio spectrum beaming through me 24/7 from corporations... do you think I like that? Do I even have a choice? I say... if the corporations can beam radio without it going through me and I listen in on someones radio then yes... that is stealing... but that is impossible. Really, you don't think the corporations would claim the radiation that leaked from a nuclear power plant onto you or the polluted water you drink or the air pollution as theirs ;) Oh no... that is different they would want you to believe. Then... it is your problem. period. qed

  • 41 Posted by racersiracer on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:25PM EDT Report Abuse

    This is absolutely ridiculous, the fine part sounds OKAY. But the jail thing is going a little to far. I mean come on, we have probably millions of people who have small wi-fi devices (such as PSP, Wii, XBOX 360, etc) that are "borrowing" internet. Jail time is an absolutely ridiculous excuse, I mean you should lock up the real bad guys, the one robbing banks and stores and burglarizing residential houses. I mean come on, those are the type of people you want to throw in jail. What is america coming too? Someone throw that guy out of the office, whoever came up with that ridiculous law, deserves to be regulated. There is a reason why we use WEP, if you don't have a password on your access point, then it is simple YOUR FAULT. Blame yourself for not protecting your stuff. I mean come on, who's fault is it if you leave your car door unlocked with your cellphone sitting inside, and you walk back to your car, and your cellphone is gone. YOUR FAULT for not locking the door. Simple logic and common sense. I think I have proven my point, any questions please feel more than free to contact me. Thanks - Frank Gutierrez

  • 42 Posted by dearambivalence on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:39PM EDT Report Abuse

    I have to agree that it's the responsibility of the subscriber to secure their connection. Yeah, in a way it's stealing if somebody leeches off your wi-fi . . . but are you going to keep your house and car doors unlocked just because you yourself wouldn't break into them if they belonged to somebody else? Come on.

More Posts: First Prev 1 2 3 Next Last

Post a Comment


My Tech

Please enable your browser's cookies to activate the My Tech column.

Also on Yahoo! Tech

Computers Home Office Wi-Fi & Networking Phones & PDAs Cameras & Camcorders TV & Home Theater Portable Audio
 

Question and Answer content at Yahoo! Tech is written by Yahoo! users at Yahoo! Answers. Yahoo! does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any Yahoo! Answers content. For more information, read the Full Disclaimer.

Opinions expressed by the Advisors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Yahoo! Inc. Yahoo! receives no compensation from any manufacturer or distributor nor does it compensate any Advisor for the coverage of any product or service in any Advisor's content.