Right or Wrong?

So my friends and I were sitting around the table having coffee and one asked a very intriguing question. She had just received a new laptop computer with wireless capability. When she opens it, it auotmatically searches for an open wireless Internet connection, and it has found one- the neighbor two houses down. And it even gives their name. So her questions were regarding general information about wireless Internet connections, how to secure them, how easy it would be to hack into one's unprotected wireless connection, what kind of damage could be done, etc.

After exchanging some general information, I said, "Obviously you don't want to tap into your neighbor's connection without his knowledge or consent."

To which one gal said, "Oh, it's no big deal. I do it all the time if mine goes down."

I said, "You know, they are the ones paying for the internet service, and if one were to use their connection without their knowledge or consent, that seems to me to be wrong, like stealing."

To which a second gal replied, "Well, it's no different than going to Starbucks to use their free WiFi or for that matter it's no different than turning on the TV and getting a signal over the airwaves."

To which I said, "I think I understand what you are saying, but there is a difference. A radio or TV transmission is paid for by sponsorships with the intention of making it available for free to the public. At Starbucks or other places where there are public WiFi connections, the person or people (possible sponsors as well) who pay for that service do so with the intention of offering it for free to the public.

"However, her neighbor is paying for his own internet connection and I highly doubt that he has any intention of offering internet service up for free to his other neighbors, nor should he be expected to, and it would be immoral and unfair to take advantage of the available connection without their knowledge or consent. It would amount to freeloading.

"Stealing utilities such as cable and phone connections are against the law too."

To which a third friend said, "Well, if they don't have the intention of offering it free to the neighborhood, then they should lock it down."

At this point my chin is sitting squarely on my chest, I can't believe how cavalier these gals are. I said, "Just because someone doesn't protect their connection doesn't make it okay to use it without their knowledge or consent. Am I the only one who think this is a big deal?"

Thankfully, another older and more respected member of our group backed me up. "If I leave my purse in my car, does that make it okay for someone to take it? If I leave my back gate unlocked, does that make it okay for just anyone to enter my backyard and lounge by the pool?"

Then the third gal said, "Well, right, leaving your purse in your car or your gate unlocked doesn't give anyone the right to take your purse or lounge by the pool. That's stealing and trespassing. But everyone should know that if they aren't going to take precautions, they leave themselves open to theft, infact inviting it"

Then she gave us an anaolgy. "If I take my kid to the park with his toys and he leaves his toys to go play on the slide and another child plays with them, is that stealing or tresspassing? I don't think so. If we didn't want someone else to play with them, then we shouldn't have left them there unattended.

"A car with it's doors unlocked doesn't sit there and say, 'Hey, my door's unlocked, come on in.' And a backyard gate doesn't scream, 'Hey, I'm not secure, come on in.' But a wireless Internet connection advertises itself and says, 'I'm over here!' It becomes the primary responsibility of the owner to protect himself."

Then I said, "So, what you are saying is that anyone who doesn't lock down their WiFi deserves to get hacked into? As though it was their fault? It still doesn't change the fact that the thief is the bad guy, not the person who failed to protect himself against the thief. And if I take my son's toys to the park and leave them unattended, I would not be surprised if another kid started playing with them. But that doesn't change the fact that it is wrong-- the kid or the kid's parents should have come to me or my son and asked permission first."

"Besides, you are comparing apples to apples and calling them oranges. You are saying it's not okay to take an unprotected purse or walk into the unsecured backyard, but it's okay to play with someone else's toys without asking just because they are there, unprotected and unsecured."

I had a conversation with my son last year about cheating. He was having trouble keeping up with his assignments in class. He had asked the girl next to him to help him. Her "help" was giving him answers to questions on an assignment. I told him that it was wrong of him to accept that type of help. 1) it meant that he was not learning the material himself and 2) the girl was doing the work for the both of them, which isn't fair to her. She is only responsible for doing her own work and my son is responsible for doing his. (I alerted the teacher and she said that she would talk to the girl about this, that she probably didn't know it was wrong to help him in that way.)

The same applies to using someone else's wireless internet connection without their knowledge or consent. It isn't fair to the person paying for the connection to supply the connection to anyone who happens to find it without having given his/her consent.


It may even be against the law. There was a case in Florida where a man was arrested for using an unprotected WiFi connection from his car outside someone's house. And there is a discussion on ZDnet about this case as well.

So, anyone have any ideas? What do you think- is it okay to "borrow" a neighbor's unprotected WiFi connection? Or is it morally wrong, and should there be a law against it?