Talk:Piggybacking (internet access)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] 2007-04-9 Automated pywikipediabot message

This page has been transwikied to Wiktionary.

The article has content that is useful at Wiktionary. Therefore the article can be found at either here or here (logs 1 logs 2.) Note: This means that the article has been copied to the Wiktionary Transwiki namespace for evaluation and formatting. It does not mean that the article is in the Wiktionary main namespace, or that it has been removed from Wikipedia's. Furthermore, the Wiktionarians might delete the article from Wiktionary if they do not find it to be appropriate for the Wiktionary. Removing this tag will usually trigger CopyToWiktionaryBot to re-transwiki the entry. This article should have been removed from Category:Copy to Wiktionary and should not be re-added there.

--CopyToWiktionaryBot 06:04, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New Hampshire

I don't understand the bill ratification process. Can someone fill me in?

The bill in question, which would legalize both wardriving and piggybacking on unsecured networks, is House Bill 495. It was passed by the New Hampshire House in March 2003, and was then reviewed by the state's Senate Judiciary Committee. If they approved it, it would take effect January 2004?

So did it take effect or not? The only thing I can find is "6/5/03, pending motion ITL, Judiciary, SJ 19, pg. 634", which is meaningless to me.

Here's a billion articles: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] — Omegatron 05:25, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

I wrote to Lee Tien of the EFF, who is quoted in the Wired article, and he points out that the language of the bill is not in the current wording, so it must not have passed. (I think this would be the latest version.) He also points out that the current wording isn't really that bad, though. It is an "affirmative defense" if the user believed that they had been authorized, would have been authorized (if they'd asked?), or could not have known that their use was unauthorized. And of course, none of this has anything to do with this article, anyway, since the laws are predominantly about piggybacking. — Omegatron 23:50, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Reading through the references, it's clear that state law varies wildly, and I don't know how we can summarize it in a short section. I doubt we want to include copies of every law like we do for New Hampshire. I'm not sure how to address this.— Omegatron 16:08, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

But one thing is very clear: Whoever tried to make this article say that it is definitely prohibited is wrong, and the article was not neutral or accurate at that time. — Omegatron 16:15, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

The last external link pointing to here appears to be broken. it should be checked that it's not temporary site failure or smth alike - Stypex 12:47, 13 November 2007 (UTC)