LOL! Yes, that response had CISSP Prep written all over it... :) On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 9:17 AM, Ziots, Edward <[email protected]> wrote:
> Just in short, > > > > The Pub owner, didn’t practice Due-care nor Due-Diligence, in there > wireless setup, thus allowing someone (s) to usethere network to commit > crimes. Therefore I would have to agree that the Pub Owner is liable and the > person that downloaded the copyrighted material is also guilty. > > > > Civil Court is based on Tort Law, there just needs to be a Preponderance > of evidence to determine guilt/liability. > > > > *preponderance of evidence* > > The degree of proof reequired in most civil actions. It means that the > greater weight and value of the credible evidence, taken as a whole. belongs > to one side in a lawsuit rather to the other side. In other words, the party > whose evidence is more convincing has a "preponderance of evidence" on its > side and must, as a matter of law, prevail in the lawsuit because it has met > its burden of proof. > > > > Therefore logs from the wireless router showing the connection from said > person to the wireless AP which was not protected ( lack of due-diligence or > due-care) along with no warning for anyone attaching to the wireless > AP/Network, and copyright infringement conducted over said network ( bases > for the communication to download such works, illegally) equals to me > preponderance of evidence by a long mile, and thus guilt on both reguards ( > the wireless AP provider, and the party which downloaded the material) > > > > PS: I am not a lawyer and this is not legal guidance, but it’s a good case > to reinforce the CISSP material I am studying for in FEB 2010. > > > > Z > > > > Edward Ziots > > Network Engineer > > Lifespan Organization > > MCSE,MCSA,MCP+I, ME, CCA, Security +, Network + > > [email protected] > > Phone:401-639-3505 > ------------------------------ > > *From:* C.E. Gene Connor [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Tuesday, December 01, 2009 3:58 PM > *To:* NT System Admin Issues > *Subject:* OT, heads up free wifi > > > > I came across this bit of what I see as a use less use of a court system. > > http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-10405824-83.html?tag=nl.e757 > > > > Or why something like this would even make it in front of a judge in the > first place. A law may have been broken and I support any laws that keep > anyone from stealing something that doesn't belong to them!! > > > > But, I'm really worried about where all this is going. I have a out of work > friend that lives next to me. I let him from time to time log into my > wireless network to job hunt and check his mail. Am I going to be put in > jail if he downloads something? Maybe I need to stop before they come > knocking on my door. > > > > Either way I just wanted you all to have a read over this. And maybe your > company and legal dept. could prevent something as this. In the event you > all might need to put into affect a user policy for you all wireless > network. For if I read it right and understand it? It could happen to any > one on this list or any of your users etc. > > > > And yes, I know this happened across the other side of the world. But, you > never know where it might go next. > > > > -- > Gene C. > > In Memory of my little brother > http://genec-lori.com/ > > PackRat GarageSale > http://genec-lori.biz/ > > Genes-Computers Inc. > Yulee ,Fl > Established 1981, Microsoft OEM Registered member, system builder & Active > registered Microsoft Partner > Active Charter Partner of The Association of System Builders and > Integrators > If you think you're beaten, Then you are! > If you give up the fight, Accept it !! > > > > > > > > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
