Fezmid

:wallbash: You're funny. The only thing I can think of that you might be referring to is the Bills DVDs... But you're breaking the same laws when you talk about a Bills game on TSW! Heck, you're breaking the law if you watch the game on a TV that's bigger than 55" according to the NFL! So have some respect for their property!!! (after the morning I've had, I really appreciate your post, thanks! ) http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070201/140812.shtml

Since morals are a personal belief of what is right and wrong, you've proven that the issue is NOT black and white for a population. Thanks.

Then that'd be his problem, not mine. You just can't admit that it's not a black and white issue, can you?

How do you know the neighbor isn't leaving his WiFi connection open on purpose?

Links? I'd like to see the details and whether it was settled out of court or not.

Lots of cities offer free WiFi that you can receive even in a residential neighborhood. Plus - as has been discussed, PCs and phones are generally set (by default) to connect to the strongest wireless signal it can find. Try again?

Why? How do you figure out which wireless networks are open for everyone and which are open because the owner doesn't know any better?

And I guarantee that law has never actually been tested in court. Just because it's a law, doesn't make it enforcable.

Your analagy still sucks. As someone else said, a better example is if your neighbor had a sprinkler and the water was landing on your property and you decided to put a jug out to capture the water for your own use. Is that "theft of service?" Of course not. Nobody's talking about going over to the neighbor's house and turning anything or activating anything. The neighbor is actively throwing the signal (water) onto your property -- and lots of places do that with the intent on people using it. How can someone defend the wireless router owner for not knowing any better, but not give the same defense to the end user who doesn't know whether the signal is free intentionally or because the wireless router owner is a moron?

It's not that cut and dry. Lots of people/businesses/cities provide free WiFi. How is the end user supposed to know which is some doorknob who doesn't know how to use his wireless router and which are real access points (perhaps provided by the city - aka: your tax dollars)?

There's very little precedent in court cases regarding file sharing. Almost all of them were settled out of court. I can only think of one that the RIAA won - and it was eventually declared a mistrial: http://www.electronista.com/articles/08/09...in.riaa.thomas/ Not much different than the Michigan guy who paid the $400 fine instead of challenging the law's validity.

I was going to post the same thing. The router does keep track and can also send those logs elsewhere. Of course if you're going to set that up, then you could also set up encryption if you didn't want someone using the router. I still maintain that you're authorized to use an unsecured WiFi signal -- as I said in my previous post, you're asking the computer for access, and it's providing the authorization. You may not know you have it setup that way, but it IS authorization (not authentication - which is disabled without encryption). But as I've said, the laws haven't been tested at all. Even the guy from Michigan mentioend in another thread did not challenge it in court because the misdemenor was the easier way out.

My iPod Touch (basically an iPhone without the phone capabilities... Ok, that sounds dumb, but you know what I mean) does that so you can surf YouTube.

I've seen that Michigan case before -- but never saw what the result was. I'd be shocked if he even had to pay a fine. And to reinforce the "gray" area: "Coincidentally, the cafe owner that Peterson was leeching WiFi off of didn't even realize that what Peterson was doing was a crime at the time. Neither did the police officer. "I had a feeling a law was being broken, but I didn't know exactly what," Sparta police chief Andrew Milanowski told the TV station."

How is an end user supposed to know whether it's a free public hot-spot or a private router broadcasting for all to use? Most people who have their PC's wireless turned on don't actually pick from a list -- they just connect to whatever is broadcasting in range (or at least that's a setting). That makes it even more of a gray area, IMHO.

More like you knock on their door, and their butler answers the door and lets you use the bathroom or telephone. The computer asks permission, the router grants permission. Not fuzzy at all.

What if you leave your lawnmower on my driveway without my permission with a sign that says, "Feel free to use me?" That's what you're doing with an unsecured wireless router. That's exactly what I say -- you're sending waves (sound vs radio) out of your house. If you don't want someone to use it, then don't broadcast it for them to use. The law is very fuzzy on this - some think it's illegal, some say it's not. Cracking WEP/WPA/WPA2 would be illegal. But if it's an open system, it's not as cut and dry. When you connect to an unsecured wireless network, your computer and router have this conversation: PC: Is there anybody out there with a network connection? Router: I'm here! PC: May I connect to you? Router: Sure can! PC: Will you please give me an IP address and tell me what your gateway is? Router: You may use IP 1.2.3.4 and gateway 1.2.3.254 PC: Thank you! So this isn't much different than knocking on someone's door to use their bathroom or telephone, except the computers are doing the talking. Shouldn't be illegal, but the laws haven't been tested much.

I have to say that you really should go at least 42". I sit about 8' away from my regular TV, and it's a 42" -- and I wish I would've had a 46-48" set. Of course I sit about 11' away from the screen in my theater, and I have a 100" screen, so...

Here's a good graph: http://www.carltonbale.com/2006/11/1080p-does-matter/

I prefer the drummette -- my wife prefers the flats. It works out well.

You do realize that this has been in development for quite some time, right...?

So if you count 1,000 individual purchases, all at $X.99, you'd rather pay that extra money than keep it for yourself? 1,000 pennies adds up. Go to a grocery store and it doesn't take too many trips to get 1,000 items.

I agree that there are other random places with great wings -- but I still always go back to Duff's. And as the original post says, the fries are AWESOME too.

http://armorgames.com/play/3140/crackshot