[olug] MPAA toolkit

[Sam Tetherow]

I think that is fundamentally wrong. It would be the equivalent of 
saying if you didn't lock your door then you deserved to be robbed. Is 
it wise to leave your doors unlocked, in most places not really, but is 
it criminal to do so? I would think not, the criminal is the person who 
breaks into your home, even if it was easy. Same goes for using someone 
else's internet connection.

Just because I'm a locksmith doesn't mean that I should be required to 
have a better lock on my door than the plumber.

Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless

Kevin wrote:
> I would say they are if they haven't applied due diligence. There is a
> difference between turning a blind eye to illegal activities and being
> blind. On a Home front, a person who operates an unsecured wireless
> access point may be forgiven if they're in, say, marketing, have never
> taken any computer security courses, have a single
> spyware/virus/trojan horse/malware-ridden Win98 box. On the other
> hand, you may not be forgiven if you teach courses in the Information
> Security track.
>
> What does this mean for universities or businesses in general? It
> would apply more to management than to sysadmins. If management
> doesn't care if you've got 800 MP3s from 400 well-known artists on
> your HD, along with KaZaa/etc, then they're going to get dinged by
> *IAA. But if people get fired for such activities after some
> port-snooping, then the courts will be more lenient to such
> businesses.
>
> On Nov 28, 2007 7:55 AM, Luke -Jr <luke at dashjr.org> wrote:
>   
>> On Wednesday 28 November 2007, Barry Von Ahsen wrote:
>>     
>>> Luke -Jr wrote:
>>>       
>>>> On Tuesday 27 November 2007, Will Langford wrote:
>>>>         
>>>>> As far as I know, ISP's do keep track of when a person was
>>>>> connected...
>>>>>           
>>>> Even if they do, this doesn't guarantee that IP's user is the customer.
>>>> The most obvious case is a drive-by wireless user.
>>>> I'm not aware of any law requiring us to log everyone who uses our
>>>> network.
>>>>         
>>> not yet at least.  California has a bill that requires wlan equipment to
>>> warn "unsecure wireless is bad, mkay" [1], and Westchester County, New
>>> York has a law requiring your wlan to be secured (for businesses at
>>> least) [2].  it's only a matter of time till the lawyers determine that
>>> providing unsecured wireless access makes you an ISP, subject to their
>>> rules and regs
>>>       
>> Then the question becomes what rules and regulations would be problematic.
>> Are cable ISPs liable for illegal activity they can't trace?
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OLUG mailing list
>> OLUG at olug.org
>> http://lists.olug.org/mailman/listinfo/olug
>>
>>     
> _______________________________________________
> OLUG mailing list
> OLUG at olug.org
> http://lists.olug.org/mailman/listinfo/olug
>
>