Hey, get real... the loss of the Internet will be a small price to pay so the RIAA can stay in business without keeping up with the times.

A guy drove by my house last night playing some really loud and awful music on his car stereo. I decided not to buy the cd he was playing. Did I just steal something?

Maybe this is how you "monitize" the Internet. Sue the poor bastard on the other end of the line ;)

It's amazing what the word "no" can do when you mean it...

RIAA: Can I see your logs?

Node: No.

RIAA: I'll make you show me.

Node: No.

RIAA: This person that says he's an official says you need to show me.

Node: Show you what?

Official Looking Person: Your logs.

Node: What logs?

OLP: Your ISP logs.

Node: What's an ISP?

OLP/RIAA: Don't get silly with me. It stands for Internet Service Provider.

Node: Oh. I don't provide the Internet as a service so I don't keep any logs like that. So no.

OLPRIAA: But I just logged onto your network and got out to the Internet.

Node: So. You can reach any number of networks from my network. It's a network.

OLPRIAA: So you admit it. You admit that your an ISP.

Node: I just told you I wasn't. Look, you still don't seem to get it. I'm a node in a network. When you talk to me you become part of that network. Hulking around with your hired henchmen demanding people show you their papers is just going to make people not want to talk to you. By the way, I see that you're capable of connecting to a network. I suggest you do your own logging.

OLPRIAA: We do.

Node: Then why are you going around harassing people like me.

OLPRIAA: We haven't anything better to do. Speaking of which, could I interest you in some aluminum siding?

Node: Ugh, no.

;)

This will indeed be an issue as open APs are all around. I recently worked on a government contract who had a wireless network. Several of us used it every day to access the net. We noticed that the local admin people were very wise and required us to use a VPN to tunnel into the intranet from the WLAN segment. Several weeks later, we were complimenting our network admin for his fine work in putting up the wireless lan, and started asking him if there were plans to move to 802.1x. His response, "What wireless lan?" evoked a collective "D'oh" from everyone present. We had been using the WLAN of .US domain registrar Neustar who was a couple floors above us. Shortly thereafter, we notified Neustar, and told them about WEP (hey, it's better than nothing.) Neustar activated WEP (and MAC ACLs, I think) and we were cut off from our wireless connection. At least one person was unhappy about losing wireless activity and was rumored to have broken in to the Neustar network. The person in question had a relatively low skill level, so I doubt they were able to succissfully steal signal from our former host.

However, it does beg the question, what if someone breaks into a WEP network? It's feasible given the proliferation of various snort like tools. Early APs didn't really have much other than stock WEP when it comes to link integrity. Is a network operator still an "attractive nuisance" if they attempt to block access but are unable to do so in the face of attackers with superior skill?

Guys: I'm not Cory.

The legal term that you are looking for here Cory is "attractive nuisance". Just because you are being friendly and opening up your WAP to random people does not absolve you of responsibility for what happens on your network. It is not so much a "dilemma" as the courts and legal theorists starting to understand the basics of the technology and deciding which existing laws and legal precedents will be applied. I am betting that next up on the "shock, horror, what are they thinking" will be the use of conspiracy charges to crack down on attempts to add half-assed anonymity to existing p2p systems.

In 1986, Metallica most certainly did not suck. And they depended on tape-traders to build their reputation. The Ramones in 1986 however, were obviously approaching suckitude, and Road to Ruin is a fine example. Luckily, they recovered.

Hey Dave W., I was here first.

Anyway, I was thinking, if I play an album for a friend and he decides not to buy it, am I (or he) not "stealing" to the same extent as if he downloads it? As with downloading, nothing was in fact taken, but it could be claimed that the action of playing it for someone other than the buyer caused greedy sons of bitches to lose business.

Edited by author 07-17-2003 12:06 PM
Is Lars going to sue me for that time in 1986 when I downloaded a metallica album from a friends vinyl onto a cassette? (I thought it sucked, and recorded the Ramones' "Road to Ruin" over it)...