re: sec. b - valid point, crappy drafting - though I'd argue that if
>
http://news.com.com/8301-10784_3-9722006-7.html?tag=tb> May 22, 2007 5:45 PM PDT
> Michigan man dodges prison in theft of Wi-Fi
> Posted by Steven Musil
> A Michigan man who used a coffee shop's unsecured Wi-Fi to check his
> e-mail from his car could have faced up to five years in prison,
> according to local TV station WOOD. But it seems few in the village
> of Sparta, Mich., were aware that using an unsecured Wi-Fi connection
> without the owner's permission--a practice known as piggybacking--was
> a felony.
> Each day around lunch time, Sam Peterson would drive to the Union
> Street Cafe, park his car and--without actually entering the coffee
> shop--check his e-mail and surf the Net. His ritual raised the
> suspicions of Police Chief Andrew Milanowski, who approached him and
> asked what he was doing. Peterson, probably not realizing that his
> actions constituted a crime, freely admitted what he was doing.
> "I knew that the Union Street had Wi-Fi. I just went down and checked
> my e-mail and didn't see a problem with that," Peterson told a WOOD
> reporter.
> Milanowski didn't immediately cite or arrest Peterson, mostly because
> he wasn't certain a crime had been committed. "I had a feeling a law
> was being broken," the chief said. Milanowski did some research and
> found Michigan's "Fraudulent access to computers, computer systems,
> and computer networks" law, a felony punishable by five years in
> prison and a $10,000 fine.
> Milanowski, who eventually swore out a warrant for Peterson, doesn't
> believe Milanowski knew he was breaking the law. "In my opinion,
> probably not. Most people probably don't."
> Indeed, neither did Donna May, the owner of the Union Street Cafe. "I
> didn't know it was really illegal, either," she told the TV station.
> "If he would have come in (to the coffee shop), it would have been
> fine."
> But apparently prosecutors were more than aware of the 1979 law,
> which was revised in 2000 to include protections for Wi-Fi networks.
> "This is the first time that we've actually charged it," Kent County
> Assistant Prosecutor Lynn Hopkins said, adding that "we'd been hoping
> to dodge this bullet for a while."
> However, Peterson won't be going to prison for piggybacking. Because
> he has no prior record, Peterson will have to pay a $400 fine, do 40
> hours of community service and enroll in the county's diversion
> program.
>
> Maybe the guy just didn't want to pay for a lawyer, but you have to
> believe this was a beatable rap. Here's the law:
>
> 752.795 Prohibited conduct.
> Sec. 5.
> A person shall not intentionally and without authorization or by
> exceeding valid authorization do any of the following:
> (a) Access or cause access to be made to a computer program,
> computer, computer system, or computer network to acquire, alter,
> damage, delete, or destroy property or otherwise use the service of a
> computer program, computer, computer system, or computer network.
> (b) Insert or attach or knowingly create the opportunity for an
> unknowing and unwanted insertion or attachment of a set of
> instructions or a computer program into a computer program, computer,
> computer system, or computer network, that is intended to acquire,
> alter, damage, delete, disrupt, or destroy property or otherwise use
> the services of a computer program, computer, computer system, or
> computer network. This subdivision does not prohibit conduct
> protected under section 5 of article I of the state constitution of
> 1963 or under the first amendment of the constitution of the United
> States.
>
> Two questions:
>
> 1. I don't use a laptop, so I don't know what you have to do to
> intentionally access an unsecured wi-fi hotspot. Generally, how would
> you know whether or not your access was "authorized," i.e. whether
> the network proprietor intended to share the bandwidth or was a
> "victim" of his own stupidity? If you see a car parked, with the
> doors unlocked and the keys in the ignition, you don't presume that
> it was left there for your joy-ride. But people do, in fact, run
> wireless networks without access restrictions, intending that they be
> used by anyone and everyone. In the story reported by CNET, the only
> thing Peterson apparently had to do was go inside and buy a cup of
> coffee, but even the owner of the coffee shop didn't seem to know
> what she was authorizing and on what terms.
>
> 2. Subsection b is presumably addressed to spyware, but read
> literally, doesn't it apply to the AirPort software that comes with a
> Mac, and presumably a Windows analog, that allows you to set your
> preferences to "automatically join" an open network?
>
> John Noble
>
>
> **********************************************************************
> For Listserv Instructions, see
http://www.lawlists.net/cyberia> Off-Topic threads:
http://www.lawlists.net/mailman/listinfo/cyberia-ot> Need more help? Send mail to:
Cyberia-L-Request@...
> **********************************************************************
>
