Gamer busted for "borrowing" library WiFi after hours
By Jeannie Choe 
posted Feb 25th 2007 4:11PM
posted Feb 25th 2007 4:11PM
We're well aware of WiFi bogarting from unsuspecting neighbors or coffee shops, but who knew there'd be a crackdown at the local house o' books? Cops couldn't leave well enough alone when they rolled up on 21 year-old Brian Tanner jammin' on some WoW-type action in a library parking lot. Tanner's lappy was confiscated and he now faces possible criminal charges for illegally accessing WiFi at the Palmer, Alaska library after hours. While the library could thwart such wardrivers by simply disabling the dang signal at closing, they continue to enforce some usage rules that Mr. Tanner may or may not have been aware of -- the authorities claim this greedy gamer's notorious for WiFi piggybacking and has been "chased out of a number of locations" in the area.
[Via Fark]
can you get sued for use free wifi liberal offers, but during 'after hour' time?
after all, there's no report that he 'hacked' into it somehow.
sorry, excuse the typos
can you get sued for using free wifi liberary offers, but during 'after hour' time?
after all, there's no report that he 'hacked' into it somehow.
This is ridiculous, could they turn off their wifi if they were so concerned about people using it after hours?
of course.
Are their any restrictions posted about it's use?
probably not.
sounds like he was clever enough to leech of a public municipality which probably didn't bother to make any restrictions.
it's called beating the system, and people do it all the time.
"it's called beating the system, and people do it all the time."
Which doesn't make it legal. The phrase "beating the system" itself pretty much implies that you're doing something you're not supposed to do. And this guy didn't "beat the system" regardless, because he got caught.
I agree that the library should just shut off their connection after hours, but it's not really a requirement for them to do so in order to be protected under the law. It's the same as if I leave my door unlocked when I go out - that doesn't mean you're free to walk in and take my stuff. I may be stupid for leaving the door unlocked, but it's still trespassing if you come in without my permission.
I think the bottom line with wi-fi is that you have to treat it the same way as any other property. You can't assume permission to use it; you have to assume the opposite. You look for explicity permission, not explicit restrictions. I don't need to tell you not to steal any of my other stuff; why would I need to tell you not to steal my bandwidth? Ignorance is not an acceptable legal defense for breaking the law.
The culture of wi-fi grew up under a slightly different set of social norms, but now that it's grown up and into the mainstream, the same laws as apply to everything else are going to be enforced.
Using another's wi-fi is not the same as leaving your door unlocked and somebody walking in and getting it. I have a better analogy for you. It would be more like if you put your belongings on my property and didn't want me to take it. If the wi-fi transmits onto the street, i think he has every right to use it (granted he was in their parking lot so he could be accused of trespassing, but thats a different situation all together). It really isn't that hard to put on the simplest of protection for wi-fi. If there is any type of protection, then i think he should be prosecuted for hacking into it.
Jeff. "It's the same as if I leave my door unlocked when I go out - that doesn't mean you're free to walk in and take my stuff."
No. That is a terrible analogy. It is more like planting a gorgeous flower garden in your front yard, and getting pissed when people stop in front of your house to take pictures of it. Sure it may be annoying that you have the occasional car full of people admiring your garden while blocking your drive, but if it really bothers you that much, put the garden in the backyard. If someone hops your fence to check out your garden, that is illegal.
Same thing with WiFi. You set up a wireless router, and people around you get on it. If that annoys you, encrypt it. If someone breaks your encryption and hacks into your internet, that is illegal.
People should really learn to think more deeply about an issue. Sure, Jeff's analogy might have seemed valid at first glimpse, but a second look, even a brief one, will tell you that it is wrong.
Or an even more accurate analogy -- it's like if my neighbor decided to broadcast a radio signal and I decided to tune in.
Unlike breaking and entering into physical property, there's no established norm yet for WiFi. Given how many businesses and people provide free WiFi, if anything, the norm is that it's okay to do so -- the same way it's okay to listen to over-the-air radio stations without paying. Unless the library explicitly said you can't access WiFi after hours, then he's not breaking any law, mutually agreed upon social norm, or contractual agreement.
Jeff: "I don't need to tell you not to steal any of my other stuff; why would I need to tell you not to steal my bandwidth?"
I think that's not a correct analogy, because the wifi net access for the library is meant to be free(? At least in the UK) and available for anyone to use. IF (big if) the library didn't explicitly say the internet is free only between x and y hours, then I do see a problem with charging him.
Personally, I don't see why they should charge him (if it's a freebie network): Library net use is for everyone, and as long as it's not illegal, he's not committing a crime?
Interesting analogy but I like this one better. If the guy was walking past the library and used a light outside the library to read something (perhaps a book he took out before it closed), is that illegal? The library is paying for the electricity for the light, right?
He/she is not infringing on or preventing the use of the utility for the one paying for it, nor is it creating additional expense for the municipality. He's just using something that would otherwise go unused. The whole concept of "stealing bandwidth" is a crock. It's no worse than "stealing light" from exterior lighting.
That being said, leaving your door unlocked in a bad neighborhood is like leaving your wifi unprotected. If they didn't have the sense to protect themselves, then they should call a computer place to have them setup security for the Library.
Yes, you can change the WPA encryption key daily.
Personally I don't think they should charge him but think about this: A library is free to go to and read the books right? It's also free to use the wifi right? But you're not allowed to go into a library after hours because thats considered breaking and entering right? So you're also not allowed to use the wifi after hours right? Still, after hours for the actual library you need to worry about books being stolen so you lock down the place. Shouldn't you worry about locking down the wifi too? And what harm was this guy doing? He was using the FREE wifi that no one else was using and in fact, he was using it at a time when he wouldn't be hogging up other peoples wifi usage.
Well, the library here apparently has a thing where they can put your books in a separate room and give you a key to pick them up after hours. The WiFi is a public service, I don't see anything wrong with using it after hours. Of course, the article Kenrick posted says that the police had previously told him not to use the WiFi at the library. That changes everything. I still don't think it's right, but that guy is stupid for using it even after being told not to.
It's a public library for goodness sakes! The whole point of public libraries is to make information available to the public. Is someone now going to tell me I can't access the libraries web site after normal business hours too? Maybe those library book return drop boxes should be off limits after hours too, we wouldn't want people stealing that service as well.
Arguing that this is theft is just silly. If anything, he was loitering, but realistically, he was using a public wifi connection. There certainly must be better things to do than pressing charges against a kid for this.
I thought the whole point of a public library was so homeless people have a place to sleep and use the bathroom during the day (sometimes, at the same time...)
The better analogy would be Bob's giving away free food at her front lawn, to any passer-bys. and some kid took a pie when Bob's not looking,
Can you sue the kid for it? Well, no, considering it was free to begin with, and the kid never break INTO the place to get it.
Clearly Mr. Tanner is too cheap to pay for his own net access since he keeps getting chased out of places. Perhaps it is time that he learns that there is no free lunch and to have some respect for business hours. Before WiFi was available in libraries the wait to look up anything in the online card catalog was a monumental pain because all the computers were tied up by gamers and visitors to adult sites. These patrons certainly weren't improving their literacy.
Must've been a good connection if he wasn't dropping packets over the air.
>Perhaps it is time that he learns that there is no free lunch and to have some respect for business hours.
I believe he has TREMENDOUS respect for business hours. the fact he was in his car instead of trying to break it shows that.
It's like getting charged for trying to read by leaning against a closed shop's window, Getting sued for "borrowing lights"
If he's not breaking any terms of service agreements, what can they do? WiFi isn't particularly embedded into our culture as to what's considered fair use.
"Ignorance of the law is no excuse" I'd imagine wouldn't work here, seeing as most people are ignorant of WiFi restrictions.
Heehe, im posting this on stolen WiFi right now. oops, gota run, the wifi patrol is out.
This guy must be desperate for his gaming fix. I live near Palmer, and no amount of WOW (or artistic male nudity for...this class I'm taking...) could keep me warm enough to sit in my car outside at night in the -15 cold.
well, technically there is no such thing as a free lunch since libraries run off of tax money, but what if it's not his town. during business hours? Then it's free.
and if it is his town?
Then he technically paid for it.
and the libraries typically tout that it is "free wifi" and don't put any restrictions on it, so how can you suddenly change that without notice?
If anything it would be loitering.
You can't steal something that is free. You CAN hoard it, but that doesn't make it illegal. It is in fact "beating the system" as i said before, which means finding either a legal gray area or loophole, not getting away with something illegal.
I once got busted at a Panera for this... just some disgruntled worker though. (I mean.. common... I get coffee there all the time..)
The "leaving the door unlocked" analogy gets thrown out there all the time. It's retarded, stop using it.
This is more analogous to me leaving the hose running in my driveway, and getting pissed at kids for playing in the resulting puddles on the street.
This guy is a wardriving legend.
Boy howdy. This could get real bad, real fast, if the cops find Jenna Jameson doing the dirty, or worse, on the lappy.
Greedy cheap ass gold farmer?
I have an anolgy for y'all.
This is like a Radio station (FM or AM) suddenly charging people for listening to their station. Anything transmitted in a public place is public domain, in my mind. XM and Sirius both transmit in the public domain, however they have security measures in place.
There are plenty of ways this library could have prevented something like this, but they didn't. And when they realized that it was a problem, they still didn't do anything. If you left your toothbrush in Grand Central Station (New York) and wanted to stop people from "borrowing" it, don't you think it would be a good idea to put it somewhere secure?
It's a city library... Just embarrass him for sitting in his car playing a game.
Police and legal action is too much - a lot of tax payers money that could be better used to buy more books for the library.
Here's some more info on the story from the Anchorage Daily News: http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/story/8667098p-8559268c.html
Don't defend him, he knew darn rightly what he was doing!
He was an idiot for thinking that hanging out in a library parking lot after hours wouldn't be suspicious. Somebody probably called in saying there has been this guy with a laptop siting in his car in the library parking lot for the past X hours late at night, I wonder what he's up to...
They are stupid in AK what do you expect, that would be like arresting somone in SF for hooking up to GOOGLES citi-wide WiFi ! Glad theylive with the eskimoes and polar bears, they dont deserve to be on he mainland usa.
Getting sued by the public library for abusing wi-fi after hours........Gives a whole new meaning to "late fees".
There's no difference between wifi and copper. You connect to a wireless network you break the law. The "free" wifi is for the patrons of the library.
http://old-www.legis.state.ak.us/cgi-bin/folioisa.dll/stattx00/query=computer+network/doc/%7B@3800%7D?
If anything, he should be revered for his resourcefulness and use of otherwise unused resources. Our tax money is paying for this WiFi to be ran 24/7, doesn't it make sense that it would be better used than not used at any given time? It's like putting money in a trash can that no one will ever use for any other reason and prosecuting the man who takes it out to feed his family...
I guess I'm a little curious as to what law this poor lad is breaking? He is not party to any TOS. The library is party to the TOS and therefore responsible for controlling access.
What, exactly, was this lad stealing? Bandwidth? Does the library really have an internet service provider that charges by the bit? I sincerely doubt it. So, what was this guy stealing?
And wi-fi as property?? WTF is that?? Is the light spilling from my window property? If I use a FRS radio, is the transmission my property? How about an FM radio station? Should they have the right to control who tunes into their program? If you tune into their program might they be able to charge you money?
How comical it is to watch people come to terms with that which they do not understand.
Wow, you guys wrote alot of analogies...yet you all know what you meant in the first place...But yeah no judge could ever charge this kid for something that stupid...the real question is "was the kid lagging?".
"There's no difference between wifi and copper. You connect to a wireless network you break the law. The "free" wifi is for the patrons of the library."
Your post contains three sentences filled with stupid.
There is plenty of difference between wifi and copper, but for the purposes of this discussion, its irrelevant, since there was no wireline hookups available.
If he was there a few hours before, when the library was open, he could sit inside and connect. Heck, he could even sit in his car and connect if he wanted to. If he can go in and connect, he is a patron.
Anyone defending the police without knowing all the facts is doing themselves a disservice. The wifi was available without requiring physical access to the library, and he took advantage of the connection on his own time. It seems that libraries are only open when the homeless and the jobless and housewives and children can take advantage of them, good on him for extending the service hours. If they didn't want people using the wifi after hours, they should have posted that fact somewhere instead of the police going all Gestapo on him.
If he was a repeat offender, I could see *some* logic in this. But busting him on public access wifi, simply because the library is closed? That doesn't add up to me.
I find it cute that they quote a Singapore conviction in on this case. If only America was in under Singapore rule, then that would be of some significance.
It is never stated if the library requires a login of some type, and if there was a signed EULA stating usage agreements. If it is just an unsecure network that is broadcasting at all times, then his actions are perfectly legal, but if there is some type of EULA that was signed by him then it may be infringement on that and subsequently illegal.
Sounds pretty outrageous. Does this mean I can open up my Wi-fi, and sue people for using it in my apartment complex?
"Sounds pretty outrageous. Does this mean I can open up my Wi-fi, and sue people for using it in my apartment complex?"
Apparently, yes. Lots of analogies here, but I think the best one is either the flowerbed in the front yard, or the FM station, but they are different.
In the flowerbed, another "user" is making ends of some sort THROUGH your (the flowerbed owner)'s effort. In the FM station case, the construct of 'public domain' comes up. Both are valid points.
OMG! I live in Palmer, AK. I am pretty surprised he got a decent WIFI signal, I mean the parking lot is pretty far from the library and all of the network stuff is somewhere between the center and far side of the library. In the Friday Mat-Su section of the Anchorage Daily News it says that he still hasn't received his lappie back even though they said they would only have it for a day. They also said that cops have FOUND HIM TAKING ADVANTAGE OF OTHER PEOPLES WIFI IN HIS NEIGHBORHOOD AND THEY TOLD HIM TO DO THAT IN A MORE PUBLIC SETTING! That's funny! Also, according to the newspaper, Tanner or
the cop don't think this will go to trial. One more thing. He lives at home with his parents who don't let him use the internet after 9pm.
I am with the vast majority of other posters here. Regardless of the law or whether or not the police told him to stop, I am totally perplexed how this is stealing. Now if the guy ran an extension cord through a hole in the wall or a window to power up his appliances? Then I would say you have a point. But I don't see this situation as the same thing.
While I guess there is no perfect analogy I do think the light scenario comes closest.
Here are some other scenarios to consider:
If i pull up to a meter and someone has left an hours worth of parking, am I stealing if I take the previous person's spot? (I know many municipalities would like to say so)
If I go to the bookstore and browse and read an article in a magazine, am I stealing if I decide not to buy the magazine? (You could make an argument, but it's weak)
If I buy a snack from a vending machine and when I go to retrieve my change, I find that a previous customer's change is also there, am I stealing if I take it?
If I go to the library or even better, if I go to the mall on a hot summer day to stay cool because I have no air conditioning in my home, am I stealing if I sit there even if I have no intention of making a purchase?
Am I stealing if I order a kid's meal (which usually has a much smaller portion) at a restaurant despite the fact I am an adult? (Whether I am being cheap is beside the point)
Sticking with food, is it stealing if I buy a meal to go and then split the bill with you?
If I am a petite woman who can fit into kid's shoes, am I stealing if I buy those instead because they are cheaper than the adult version?
Was it stealing when people used to signal each other by ringing the telephone as way of communicating because they didn't want to pay for message units or be charged for a toll call? (Most of you are probably too young to remember that)
Is it stealing to check your e-mail while at work? (Most jobs have eased up on this, I think)
I think I have written enough. Obviously, none of these are clear-cut, but I think most of us would not consider these situations to be stealing either. This is not a situation where a bank teller or store cashier gives you too much change. Or where an item somehow is mistakenly put in the clearance bin - despite every other item in the inventory properly placed. I would love to know where others stand.
It should be fine for him to use the wifi after hours like how it's fine to sit on the bench in fron of the library after hours.
He was wrong, but how will he be penalized? Pay back what the library has lost? Which is $0?
1) The library does normally shut off the wifi after hours; they left it on for a tech
2) He has been going around town mooching wifi, and has been repeatedly chased off
3) the guy was told by the police to bugger off the night before, because it is illegal, but the moron chose to come back
As an analogy, look at it as hopping onto somebody's cordless phone base station. Just because my neighbour has a cordless phone system that can broadcast to my property, does not mean that I 'tis okay for me to hop on and use his long-distance or listen in on his calls.
Enough with the fucking analogies! consumer_q wins though
Look - the fact of the matter is that wifi is up to you to protect. If you leave it open then it's fine for anyone to use it. I don't care what you try to anology it up to. The best rule to remember is that you should never make a rule you can't enforce. Even if the library says you can't use it after hours - they simply can't enforce it.
Now they may be able to prosecute for trespassing BUT I believe I'd simply have my best friend go and park in the parking lot and just sit there listening to music. When the cops come just say you are waiting for someone to meet you. If the cops say you have to leave then ok it's equal oportunity "rules just to make rules" but they are at least enforcing it consistantly. If the cops on the other hand let my friend sit and wait there. BOOM Baby - discrimination law suite and your done with the whole issue.
Any wireless network un-protected is up for grabs, but be careful of the risk - I sometimes turn my protection off just to let stragglers in and then screw with them :).
Point at hand the library can secure it or they can shut their holes. It doesn't cost them anything more for him to be using it after hours. It's just someone being petty. The internet should be free to everyone anytime. In this case our friend Tanner may be just too cheap - or maybe he really can't afford it. Regardless - he shouldn't have to deal with this crap.
There is another aspect of free WiFi, or unsecured wireless networks, which actually poses a problem for some. On this post http://megabluewave.com/blog/archives/92 I wrote about an incident which happened in and around my home. One of my neighbors has unsecured WiFi which provided unfiltered internet access in my home. This is something that I do not want and I felt in a way intruded upon in the privacy of my own home. After I wrote a nice email to the neighbor he installed encryption on his network and "got out of my home."
dunno what to say, heck I'm a piggybacker!!!!!!!!!
I don't see the problem. Its FREE WIFI service. If they don't want people using it, they should shut it down. You can't say its free for one thing but not others.
If they don't want someone gaming on it, put bandwidth limits on it.
I work in the IT department for a large college and we have multiple wifi setups. One is a public free access, but it is limited to how much you can download. Once you reach your limit, you are disconnected. They could do the same at the library. He won't be playing WOW for long until it boots him. He may not be "downloading" files per say, but the game is sending data back and forth and he will hit the limit quickly. Then its game over.
Arresting someone for using the FREE WiFi seems really stupid.
As a librarian I personally don't understand the issue. Some libraries might have policies against World of Warcraft (or some have policies against myspace).
This isn't because they don't agree w/ the content, but because so much bandwidth goes to it that it prohibits "research" use.
After hours, however, unless he's causing some harm I just don't see why they'd care.
In a way- he's actually helping the library. Libraries exist to provide services to the public. He's keeping away from being a bandwidth hog during the day. Sounds like he's being a model citizen to me.
I work in IT for a fairly large library system, we have 17 libaries. We leave our wifi on 24 hours a day and we don't care if anyone uses it after hours.
Okay so if I put my trash out on the curb it's free for everyone to enjoy... including identity thieves.
But if I put my wireless internet out on the curb no everyone can enjoy it?
Law enforcement needs to see the benefit of being able to have it legal to access people's wifi without their knowledge. They could catch bad guys easy without that little road block.
From reading the article I don't think he broke any laws but what he has done was certainly unethical but not illegal. Now for people who say it's free access but it's not free. The citizens of that town or district pays for that access through it's taxes and for the town citizens to use and not only for him to take advantage of. Of course the person who took advantage of the unsecured access isn't the only one at fault for the library should have encrypted their signal in the first place. Now if they do charge him (I don't what would be the charge) and found guilty (I don't know how that will happen) all he probably do is community service and maybe be on probation but nothing serious.
Having worked for the ISP that provides access to the library in Palmer...YES they ARE being charged per bit.
有點....誇張
如果沒有鎖的話~那應該是圖書館自己的問題吧?
This is ridiculous. The airwaves belong to the public. If your wifi signal is out there and you haven't taken any steps to technologically ward off users, then tough.
Imagine if Sirius radio used AM/FM signals, then prosecuted nonsubscribers for tuning in.
Some things are patently obvious. The civil servants of Palmer, AK need to disabuse themselves of the idea that they own the airwaves.
Please don't read your library book after hours. Especially in the parking lot or we will have to arrest you.