Unsecured wifi might be contributory negligence
maryhawking at tigers.demon.co.uk
Wed Feb 15 21:49:59 GMT 2012
Does this apply to private users?
Suppose an OAP comes on the internet and does not realise that there is a
way to secure the WiFi router (or does not realise it *is* wifi - and
junior-next-door uses it - will the OAP be held liable?
If so, will the Internet Provider have failed in its Duty of Care (if it has
"thinking - independent thinking - is to humans as swimming is to cats: we
can do it if we really have to." Mark Earles on Radio 4.
and don't forget patients like Fred!
From: Theo Markettos [mailto:theom+news at chiark.greenend.org.uk]
Sent: 14 February 2012 11:42
To: UK Cryptography Policy Discussion Group
Subject: Re: Unsecured wifi might be contributory negligence
In article <KsB7ZVDbBVMPFAlV at perry.co.uk> Roland Perry wrote:
> "A federal lawsuit filed in Massachusetts could test the question of
> whether individuals who leave their wireless networks unsecured can be
> held liable if someone uses the network to illegally download
> copyrighted content."
How does this differ from a secured but public network? Can operators of
coffee shop or hotel lobby wifi networks, which are secured but have a
password obtainable from the desk, be held responsible for traffic that
their users generate?
Are hotels liable for abusive phone calls made by their guests?
More information about the ukcrypto