Use free Wi-Fi, get arrested

arrested for free wifi use

How was this man detected and identified as using the free wifi?

Use free wi-fi with no

Use free wi-fi with no problem :)

http://hotspot.airdump.net

This is not true in Georgia,

This is not true in Georgia, at least how the law is currently understood and there have been no arrests for accessing an "open" wi-fi hotspot that I am aware of. In this state accessing a wi-fi location is only a crime if that access point is WEP--or otherwise password--protected. ASSUMING that the person gaining access doesn't otherwise cause harm to the network by, say, deleting or copying data, etc. By the same token, simple wardriving--the enumerating of wireless access points--isn't illegal either.

I have been stopped twice by both the Roswell PD and the Fulton County Sheriffs Dept. on this issue. While the Roswell cop was very cool with things [my car @ 3am in a deserted parking lot] once he knew what I was doing and not casing the local bank, the Fulton County Sheriff was a total a**hole, squared--I was threatened with arrest despite the fact that she could not state exactly what law I was violating and forced to "move on" again without reason or authority, other than "sitting in a car with a laptop" was "pretty weird". Her watch captain, however, did give me an apology after I called to complain. A HINT TO MY FELLOW COMPUTER GEEKS: My MacBook Pro comes with a built-in microphone and webcam, which can be set up to record live action when the proper keys are pressed. At least the audio portion of my confrontation came in handy when I complained... surprisingly enough the deputy had a "differing version" of events set forth on her incident report than what was recorded. If harassing a computer geek isn't against the law, making false statements on an offical report certainly is.

This could probably be won

This could probably be won on appeal(s) (but probably not worth the trouble). FCC rules would prevail over Michigan's. Peterson, the "perp" was merely receiving a broadcast signal, which we are all generally free to do. And he was legally broadcasting his own signal, which the cafe was free to ignore. The charge was for fraudulent access. Where was the fraud?

If they can't figure out a

If they can't figure out a way to distribute the WEP key to customers - it is there loss. Maybe they should be sued for broadcasting beyond their property!

Pererson...if you did not

Pererson...if you did not complete a prior on-line form and was not warned. Appeal the case and ask WHAT FRAUDULENT ACT was commited under the law of Fraudulent access to computers, computer systems, and computer networks" law.
Cases can be propaganda meaning it was interpreted wrong as this ocase other cases are based on this one… meaning wrong interpretation making it propaganda.

Most of you do not have a

Most of you do not have a clue or apparently the Michigan Justice Department.
Unless he completed an online form prior to the usuage, such as answering a quesion... Are you in the coffee shop...or did you make a purchase and he LIED...or Committed a FRUADUALNT act he did not break the law..."Fraudulent access to computers, computer systems, and computer networks" law.
Most of our Justice do not under a lot of the Technology laws... It is NOT compared to leaving keys in a car, Items outside a store or even a house unlocked.
How many of you listen to the Radio...How do you know it is free... If the waves are out there and you are NOT HACKING to get them or committing a Fraundlent act (LIEING) to get it or into it... you did not break their law... But again... this is a new area for the Justice Department... Do not compare it the other things listed above.

What makes this case both

What makes this case both unusual and disturbing is that Peterson wasn't warned prior to being arrested. In every other case I'm aware of the alleged perpetrator was warned to stop using the hotspot, and was arrested after refusing to comply with the warning. That Peterson wasn't warned, and wasn't aware that he was breaking the law is really what concerns me about this case. It sets a bad precedent.

The interesting thing is

The interesting thing is that neither the police or the cafe owner knew what crime Peterson was committing until AFTER he was arrested.

My question is, was there an acceptable use policy in place that you had to agree to before using the service, and if so, did it state the limits for use (inside the cafe walls)?

Craig is right. Lots of

Craig is right. Lots of stores leave merchandize on display outside the store all the time. Doesn’t mean it’s free and you can just load up what you want and drive off. Just because there is no padlock on the shed or your front door is unlocked that all your stuff is now free for the taking. You should not have to post a private property sign on your door to prevent trespassing.