Re: [Wikimediauk-l] So who knows about their local wifi?
On 01/05/12 00:01, Thomas Dalton wrote: On 30 April 2012 23:52, Roger Bamkinvictuall...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Thomas, the legal position is far from clear. I'm hoping to get a steer on current custom and practice. I see that lots of wifi's have tick boxes for Tc's why? Am I happy to take legal advise from WMUK? Thats not what I asked. I'm quite happy to see if they can point me at a relevant law or know of an example of good custom and practise. I didn't say WMUK and you haven't asked WMUK... what does WMUK have to do with it? A common mistake, to confuse WMUK with Wikimedia-L !! :-) Gordo ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] So who knows about their local wifi?
I recall a friend (who knows stuff) ran an open wifi network at home, in a house that stood in a field in the countryside. I said, what is your security? He replied: my dog - it barks if anybody gets close enough to see the wifi signal. Case closed, m'lud? Gordo ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] So who knows about their local wifi?
On 30 April 2012 22:56, Roger Bamkin roger.bam...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: Hi guys, I'm interested in wifis. We have some concerns about the legalities of allowing anonymous users to use a free wifi system without giving their email addresses or agreeing to terms and conditions. Can't tell you where - but you might guess Does anyone... Know what the legal position is and any important guidelines that may apply? Computer Misuse Act 1990 and the ISP's terms of service are the most obvious. -- geni ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] So who knows about their local wifi?
On 1 May 2012 10:06, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote: On 30 April 2012 22:56, Roger Bamkin roger.bam...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: Hi guys, I'm interested in wifis. We have some concerns about the legalities of allowing anonymous users to use a free wifi system without giving their email addresses or agreeing to terms and conditions. Can't tell you where - but you might guess Does anyone... Know what the legal position is and any important guidelines that may apply? Computer Misuse Act 1990 and the ISP's terms of service are the most obvious. Talk to a lawyer, that's the best advice. The misuse of open access points is not well tried in law - but you are certainly responsible for its use. You may also be required to log certain information about the users (which I believe is the main reason most ask for an email address). And as Geni mentions, sometimes the ISP you are using mandates certain things - such as protected Wifi. So you need to review that carefully. More than anything it depends on the context; if you are talking about a small endeavour at, say, a meeting venue you're probably alright using an ad-hoc setup. But if you are talking an entirely public network then things are more complex. To be honest; once you are at that level you should be talking to a professional company anyway, as supplying Wifi of that sort is a non-trivial technical exercise. And they will know exactly what is required. But; ask someone with relevant legal expertise. Tom ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] So who knows about their local wifi?
On 1 May 2012 10:35, Thomas Morton morton.tho...@googlemail.com wrote: More than anything it depends on the context; if you are talking about a small endeavour at, say, a meeting venue you're probably alright using an ad-hoc setup. But if you are talking an entirely public network then things are more complex. To be honest; once you are at that level you should be talking to a professional company anyway, as supplying Wifi of that sort is a non-trivial technical exercise. And they will know exactly what is required. I note also the Hack Day Manifesto (really a how-to), which goes into quite some detail on the technical side (though not the legal one): http://hackdaymanifesto.com/ - d. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] So who knows about their local wifi?
On 1 May 2012 11:04, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 1 May 2012 10:35, Thomas Morton morton.tho...@googlemail.com wrote: More than anything it depends on the context; if you are talking about a small endeavour at, say, a meeting venue you're probably alright using an ad-hoc setup. But if you are talking an entirely public network then things are more complex. To be honest; once you are at that level you should be talking to a professional company anyway, as supplying Wifi of that sort is a non-trivial technical exercise. And they will know exactly what is required. I note also the Hack Day Manifesto (really a how-to), which goes into quite some detail on the technical side (though not the legal one): http://hackdaymanifesto.com/ As one of the Hack Day Manifesto drafting cabal, I'll note why we didn't... Firstly, because we aren't lawyers. If you are a lawyer, the Hack Day Manifesto is on Github, and, as we say on Wikipedia, anyone can edit. Secondly, because what we do know about the law on wifi, it's actually very difficult to know what is required. When the Digital Economy Act was up for debate, one of the provisions, if I recall correctly, would require closing of open wifi following repeated copyright infringement complaints, but whether that is going to be required is something I believe we are still waiting upon from the official Ofcom guidance (not to go political, but having a law where you basically pass it without reading it, then have someone else work out exactly what it means is a hermeneutic strategy that should make postmodernists very happy and anyone who values transparency and deliberation not so happy). There are still some very strange questions about whether or not using a weak protection system for wifi would count - WEP is now trivially crackable, and WPA rather than WPA2 is also trivial to crack... requiring WPA2 means certain older devices can't connect to wifi. It'd certainly be useful for everybody involved if we could have some lawyers work out exactly what the current civil and criminal penalties and issues of concern are around open wifi usage. I say that as someone who lives right out in the countryside and, partly on principle, keeps his wifi completely open. Why? Because I believe that if you should be unfortunate enough to find yourself standing outside my house, the least you should be able to do is check Google Maps to find your way to where you are going. Given that we have really bad GPS reception, almost no mobile reception, certainly no 3G reception, I see almost no benefit in preventing people from leeching a little bandwidth from me... on the basis that if I were momentarily outside their house, I'd really like to be able to do likewise. Share and share alike, be the change you want to see and all that. Security expert Bruce Schneier does similarly: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/01/my_open_wireles.html Of course, if some bastard tracks me down, camps outside my house and uses my wifi to upload his kiddy porn stash, nuclear bomb construction instructions or the contents of their 'Lady Gaga' CD-RW to Wikileaks, and I end up in jail, that would suck quite considerably. Hence why having some guidance from actual lawyers would be quite useful. -- Tom Morris http://tommorris.org/ ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] So who knows about their local wifi?
On 1 May 2012 11:24, Tom Morris t...@tommorris.org wrote: On 1 May 2012 11:04, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: I note also the Hack Day Manifesto (really a how-to), which goes into quite some detail on the technical side (though not the legal one): http://hackdaymanifesto.com/ As one of the Hack Day Manifesto drafting cabal, I'll note why we didn't... [snip sensible stuff] The key takeaway I got is talk to your ISP. In practical terms, I expect a one-day event of a defined nature done by nice people of social standing (e.g. WMUK) should be able to get away with quite a lot, even if a miscreant might happen to be hanging around outside just near enough to get reception and violate copyright. Even if record companies would prefer everyone, including educational charities, to regard the internet with fear and loathing. - d. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] So who knows about their local wifi?
Forgive the scathing cynicism, but we're governed by retards who I wouldn't trust to change a 13-amp fuse! Let alone actually realise that 99% of household equipment could get by with a 1-amp, or less, fuse. I _know_ my local WiFi ;-) (SSID: xx, Key: not telling). I also know that WEP is so trivially broken that, pardon the pun, there's an app for that. WPA is not a great deal better. I've broken a couple just to prove the point. If you're planning to run an open point, do it and be damned. If this is a 'public service', and some media mogul tries to sue you then half the country would chip in to a legal fighting fund. Sadly, Wikimedia UK has to be 'polite' to politicians; I suspect David Gerard would gleefully join me in setting about them with a clue-by-four, and tell them, bluntly, to defer to the likes of Sir Tim Berners-Lee on what is good for the Internet. The Digital Economy Act should be overturned. The Limp-Dems promised to do so - until they ended up in a coalition with Cameron. Now, I'm dealing with repeated alarmist emails from 38 Degrees about plans to grant the police and security services carte blanche snooping powers. I could say I told you so, and you could search for INDECT on Wikinews. I, very infrequently, chip in on this list; and, the above is 'quite a rant'. However, I'm of the opinion that WM-UK should be an active advocate for a free and unfettered Internet. Thankfully my own hacking exploits predate the Computer Misuse Act. But, when I'm back online at home, I'll be joining the mayhem in running a Tor node, and whoever in the police told Cameron they'd like more powers can explain how they can't crack real encryption. Brian McNeil -- Wikinews, Accredited Reporter. Personal: brian.mcn...@o2.co.uk Facts don't cease to be facts, but news ceases to be news. Original Message Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] So who knows about their local wifi? From: Tom Morris t...@tommorris.org Date: Tue, May 01, 2012 11:24 am To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org On 1 May 2012 11:04, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 1 May 2012 10:35, Thomas Morton morton.tho...@googlemail.com wrote: More than anything it depends on the context; if you are talking about a small endeavour at, say, a meeting venue you're probably alright using an ad-hoc setup. But if you are talking an entirely public network then things are more complex. To be honest; once you are at that level you should be talking to a professional company anyway, as supplying Wifi of that sort is a non-trivial technical exercise. And they will know exactly what is required. I note also the Hack Day Manifesto (really a how-to), which goes into quite some detail on the technical side (though not the legal one): http://hackdaymanifesto.com/ As one of the Hack Day Manifesto drafting cabal, I'll note why we didn't... Firstly, because we aren't lawyers. If you are a lawyer, the Hack Day Manifesto is on Github, and, as we say on Wikipedia, anyone can edit. Secondly, because what we do know about the law on wifi, it's actually very difficult to know what is required. When the Digital Economy Act was up for debate, one of the provisions, if I recall correctly, would require closing of open wifi following repeated copyright infringement complaints, but whether that is going to be required is something I believe we are still waiting upon from the official Ofcom guidance (not to go political, but having a law where you basically pass it without reading it, then have someone else work out exactly what it means is a hermeneutic strategy that should make postmodernists very happy and anyone who values transparency and deliberation not so happy). There are still some very strange questions about whether or not using a weak protection system for wifi would count - WEP is now trivially crackable, and WPA rather than WPA2 is also trivial to crack... requiring WPA2 means certain older devices can't connect to wifi. It'd certainly be useful for everybody involved if we could have some lawyers work out exactly what the current civil and criminal penalties and issues of concern are around open wifi usage. I say that as someone who lives right out in the countryside and, partly on principle, keeps his wifi completely open. Why? Because I believe that if you should be unfortunate enough to find yourself standing outside my house, the least you should be able to do is check Google Maps to find your way to where you are going. Given that we have really bad GPS reception, almost no mobile reception, certainly no 3G reception, I see almost no benefit in preventing people from leeching a little bandwidth from me... on the basis that if I were momentarily outside their house, I'd really like to be able to do likewise. Share and share alike, be the change you want to see and all that. Security expert Bruce Schneier does similarly: https
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] So who knows about their local wifi?
You have again exceed my expectations. I knew this was a tricky area and you have mapped it's boundaries and key features. Same as I would have got from three trips to a lawyer . THX On May 1, 2012 2:10 PM, brian.mcn...@wikinewsie.org wrote: Forgive the scathing cynicism, but we're governed by retards who I wouldn't trust to change a 13-amp fuse! Let alone actually realise that 99% of household equipment could get by with a 1-amp, or less, fuse. I _know_ my local WiFi ;-) (SSID: xx, Key: not telling). I also know that WEP is so trivially broken that, pardon the pun, there's an app for that. WPA is not a great deal better. I've broken a couple just to prove the point. If you're planning to run an open point, do it and be damned. If this is a 'public service', and some media mogul tries to sue you then half the country would chip in to a legal fighting fund. Sadly, Wikimedia UK has to be 'polite' to politicians; I suspect David Gerard would gleefully join me in setting about them with a clue-by-four, and tell them, bluntly, to defer to the likes of Sir Tim Berners-Lee on what is good for the Internet. The Digital Economy Act should be overturned. The Limp-Dems promised to do so - until they ended up in a coalition with Cameron. Now, I'm dealing with repeated alarmist emails from 38 Degrees about plans to grant the police and security services carte blanche snooping powers. I could say I told you so, and you could search for INDECT on Wikinews. I, very infrequently, chip in on this list; and, the above is 'quite a rant'. However, I'm of the opinion that WM-UK should be an active advocate for a free and unfettered Internet. Thankfully my own hacking exploits predate the Computer Misuse Act. But, when I'm back online at home, I'll be joining the mayhem in running a Tor node, and whoever in the police told Cameron they'd like more powers can explain how they can't crack real encryption. Brian McNeil -- Wikinews, Accredited Reporter. Personal: brian.mcn...@o2.co.uk Facts don't cease to be facts, but news ceases to be news. Original Message Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] So who knows about their local wifi? From: Tom Morris t...@tommorris.org Date: Tue, May 01, 2012 11:24 am To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org On 1 May 2012 11:04, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 1 May 2012 10:35, Thomas Morton morton.tho...@googlemail.com wrote: More than anything it depends on the context; if you are talking about a small endeavour at, say, a meeting venue you're probably alright using an ad-hoc setup. But if you are talking an entirely public network then things are more complex. To be honest; once you are at that level you should be talking to a professional company anyway, as supplying Wifi of that sort is a non-trivial technical exercise. And they will know exactly what is required. I note also the Hack Day Manifesto (really a how-to), which goes into quite some detail on the technical side (though not the legal one): http://hackdaymanifesto.com/ As one of the Hack Day Manifesto drafting cabal, I'll note why we didn't... Firstly, because we aren't lawyers. If you are a lawyer, the Hack Day Manifesto is on Github, and, as we say on Wikipedia, anyone can edit. Secondly, because what we do know about the law on wifi, it's actually very difficult to know what is required. When the Digital Economy Act was up for debate, one of the provisions, if I recall correctly, would require closing of open wifi following repeated copyright infringement complaints, but whether that is going to be required is something I believe we are still waiting upon from the official Ofcom guidance (not to go political, but having a law where you basically pass it without reading it, then have someone else work out exactly what it means is a hermeneutic strategy that should make postmodernists very happy and anyone who values transparency and deliberation not so happy). There are still some very strange questions about whether or not using a weak protection system for wifi would count - WEP is now trivially crackable, and WPA rather than WPA2 is also trivial to crack... requiring WPA2 means certain older devices can't connect to wifi. It'd certainly be useful for everybody involved if we could have some lawyers work out exactly what the current civil and criminal penalties and issues of concern are around open wifi usage. I say that as someone who lives right out in the countryside and, partly on principle, keeps his wifi completely open. Why? Because I believe that if you should be unfortunate enough to find yourself standing outside my house, the least you should be able to do is check Google Maps to find your way to where you are going. Given that we have really bad GPS reception, almost no mobile reception, certainly no 3G reception, I
[Wikimediauk-l] So who knows about their local wifi?
Hi guys, I'm interested in wifis. We have some concerns about the legalities of allowing anonymous users to use a free wifi system without giving their email addresses or agreeing to terms and conditions. Can't tell you where - but you might guess Does anyone... - Know what the legal position is and any important guidelines that may apply? - Know of a large public free wifi system that doesn't demand registration and/or tc s? I' m obviously interested in liberal examples.? So you have 24 hours! Thanks in anticipation -- Roger Bamkin ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] So who knows about their local wifi?
Are you really going to use wikimediauk-l as your legal advisors? You're going to have to get professional legal advice anyway, so why ask us first? On 30 April 2012 22:56, Roger Bamkin roger.bam...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: Hi guys, I'm interested in wifis. We have some concerns about the legalities of allowing anonymous users to use a free wifi system without giving their email addresses or agreeing to terms and conditions. Can't tell you where - but you might guess Does anyone... Know what the legal position is and any important guidelines that may apply? Know of a large public free wifi system that doesn't demand registration and/or tc s? I' m obviously interested in liberal examples.? So you have 24 hours! Thanks in anticipation -- Roger Bamkin ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] So who knows about their local wifi?
Hi Thomas, the legal position is far from clear. I'm hoping to get a steer on current custom and practice. I see that lots of wifi's have tick boxes for Tc's why? Am I happy to take legal advise from WMUK? Thats not what I asked. I'm quite happy to see if they can point me at a relevant law or know of an example of good custom and practise. Roger On 30 April 2012 22:59, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: Are you really going to use wikimediauk-l as your legal advisors? You're going to have to get professional legal advice anyway, so why ask us first? On 30 April 2012 22:56, Roger Bamkin roger.bam...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: Hi guys, I'm interested in wifis. We have some concerns about the legalities of allowing anonymous users to use a free wifi system without giving their email addresses or agreeing to terms and conditions. Can't tell you where - but you might guess Does anyone... Know what the legal position is and any important guidelines that may apply? Know of a large public free wifi system that doesn't demand registration and/or tc s? I' m obviously interested in liberal examples.? So you have 24 hours! Thanks in anticipation -- Roger Bamkin ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org -- Roger Bamkin 01332 702993 0758 2020815 Google+:Victuallers Skype:Victuallers1 Flickr:Victuallers2 ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] So who knows about their local wifi?
On 30 April 2012 23:52, Roger Bamkin victuall...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Thomas, the legal position is far from clear. I'm hoping to get a steer on current custom and practice. I see that lots of wifi's have tick boxes for Tc's why? Am I happy to take legal advise from WMUK? Thats not what I asked. I'm quite happy to see if they can point me at a relevant law or know of an example of good custom and practise. I didn't say WMUK and you haven't asked WMUK... what does WMUK have to do with it? ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] So who knows about their local wifi?
On 1 May 2012, at 00:01, Thomas Dalton wrote: On 30 April 2012 23:52, Roger Bamkin victuall...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Thomas, the legal position is far from clear. I'm hoping to get a steer on current custom and practice. I see that lots of wifi's have tick boxes for Tc's why? Am I happy to take legal advise from WMUK? Thats not what I asked. I'm quite happy to see if they can point me at a relevant law or know of an example of good custom and practise. I didn't say WMUK and you haven't asked WMUK... what does WMUK have to do with it? Perhaps WMUK community (or UK Wikimedia community, or however you want to phrase it) makes Roger's email clearer? Wikimedians are generally so good with legal issues (as is particularly well demonstrated by the average Wikimedian's knowledge of copyright law), and also researching things (well demonstrated by Wikipedia articles...), that Roger's request for pointers towards legal positions and important guidelines, or case studies that already exist, seems to me to be a very logical request. He wasn't asking for legal advice - he was asking for pointers to advice and information given by others. Going to a lawyer is expensive, particularly if you count it in terms of the number of financial donations to Wikimedia that it equates to (roughly, it would be about 10-15 donations per hour). I can well imagine Wikimedians being up in arms if WMUK was continually asking lawyers questions where the answers might already be well known in the community - indeed, I'd be one of the first to be up in arms in that situation... So please, assume good faith here. And if anyone has answers to Roger's questions, please share. :-) Thanks, Mike ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
