how can free wifi providers "rat" anyone out if they dont require login? best they can give is a MAC address, which is easily spoofed.

Starbucks, FTR, doesnt give free wifi. you have to have a paid account with T-Mobile to use Starbucks wifi. Barnes and Noble, also.

12/7/2007 2:52:06 AM

Quote :

"The statute says "Anyone providing an "electronic communication service" or "remote computing service" to the public who learns about the transmission or storage of information about certain illegal activities or an illegal image ""

Funny. I wonder how this jibes with the recent prosecution where a guy spied on his wife using packaged spyware. He was sentenced to four years in prison for violating wiretapping statutes ("unlawful interception of electronic communication").

"But your honor, I was spying on her computer because I thought she might have kiddie porn! And since we have a wifi network, I am proving an 'electronic communication service'!"

Seriously -- does the statute absolve private individuals of wiretapping culpability if they reasonably suspect these certain illegal activities are taking place on their network. And if not, what's the point?

12/7/2007 5:26:21 AM

No. As many, including the arstechnia article have pointed out, it doesn't.

It says that IF you find out about it, you are legally obligated to report it. It DOES NOT say that you should illegally spy on people or that you have to do any sort of monitoring of the traffic. In fact, it's quite clear on that point.

Also, I'm quite sure that information gathered illegally will be difficult to use as evidence in a court case, just as it is now.

12/7/2007 8:34:19 AM

x

[Edited on December 7, 2007 at 10:29 AM. Reason : didn't see agentlions post]

12/7/2007 10:28:28 AM

Quote :

"It says that IF you find out about it, you are legally obligated to report it. It DOES NOT say that you should illegally spy on people or that you have to do any sort of monitoring of the traffic. In fact, it's quite clear on that point."

that's how it always starts....the Gov isn't going to come out and acknowledge they're raping you of yet another civil liberty, and even more frightening imo they're getting private businesses to be internet watchdogs.

12/7/2007 10:40:47 AM

Big Brother is watching

12/7/2007 12:02:05 PM

i think this deserves a repost for page 2

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20071206-safe-act-wont-turn-mom-and-pop-shops-into-wifi-cops.html

Quote :

"ISPs could face tougher penalties for failing to report child pornography under a bill passed yesterday by the House, but don't start searching the skies for the black helicopters yet: the bill doesn't require any active surveillance of user behavior, and it won't affect your local coffee shop's WiFi, despite what you may have read."

Quote :

"Now, what does the bill not do? It explicitly tells ISPs that they do not need to "monitor any user, subscriber, or customer," they do not need to "monitor the content of any indication," or even "affirmatively seek facts or circumstances." In other words, if you see it, you are legally obligated to report it, but ISPs do not need to become child porn detectives."

Quote :

"WiFi isn't mentioned in the bill. Neither are coffee shops, libraries, or individuals running access points in their basements. The bill's provisions apply to anyone "engaged in providing an electronic communication service or a remote computing service to the public through a facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce." Parse that as you will."

Quote :

"Whatever the bill applies to, though, the law is quite clear that those who offer Internet access don't have to do any additional monitoring. There are no "restrictions" on their services. The bill updates an already-existing notifcation requirement and stiffens the penalties, but only for those presented with clear evidence of child porn who make a "knowing and willful failure" to report it."

12/7/2007 2:06:25 PM

Quote :

"but only for those presented with clear evidence of child porn who make a "knowing and willful failure" to report it.""

how often does that actually happen? often enough to warrant a whole new bill? Seems fishy to me.

Quote :

"engaged in providing an electronic communication service or a remote computing service to the public through a facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce." "

virtually anything to do with the internet could be considered interstate commerce nowadays

Quote :

"they do not need to "monitor the content of any indication," or even "affirmatively seek facts or circumstances." "

So that just means we'll have companies crying wolf all the time to avoid missing something and getting fined.


and like I said before, even if they know there is the possibility (or even intent) of infringing on our rights, they're going to make it seem like that's never going to happen.......

Don't trust 'em as far as you could throw 'em.

12/7/2007 2:51:46 PM

Smoker4:

Quote :

"And if not, what's the point?"

12/8/2007 5:56:41 PM