Re: [WISPA] OPEN Access POint in Legal Case

[Peter R.]

This proves the point that most laws can only catch the stupid.
The smart ones usually only get caught when they deal with a stupid 
associate.



Brandon Brownlee wrote:


The article should be named "... an open WiFi network is no defense ... when
you have burned CDs of illegal content in your room[, expletive-pronoun]".
Would it have been a valid defense if the illegal content wasn't found in
this man's room, though? 


Thanks for the link! The links from that article are great to read as well.
Love that site.


Brandon


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] OPEN Access POint in Legal Case

[Brandon Brownlee]

The article should be named "... an open WiFi network is no defense ... when
you have burned CDs of illegal content in your room[, expletive-pronoun]".
Would it have been a valid defense if the illegal content wasn't found in
this man's room, though? 

Thanks for the link! The links from that article are great to read as well.
Love that site.


Brandon

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Justin S. Wilson
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 10:35 AM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] OPEN Access POint in Legal Case


http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070422-child-porn-case-shows-that-an-
open-wifi-network-is-no-defense.html


 


Child
  porn case shows that an open WiFi
network is no defense


By Eric Bangeman   |
Published: April 22, 2007 - 11:30PM CT 

The merits of leaving your wireless access point (WAP) open have been
discussed and debated at length, especially when it comes to law
enforcement. There is a growing belief that file sharers can protect
themselves against lawsuits by keeping their wireless access points open.
The problem is, it won't necessarily. 

A Texas man who was convicted of possessing child pornography tried to use
his open WiFi network as a defense, saying that someone else could have used
the same network to traffic in pornographic images. The US Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit didn't buy his argument and upheld the conviction.

 

 

 

Justin

 

--

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/