AKMA’s Random Thoughts

Perhaps the constabulary in a town equally famous for the slaughter of cetaceans and for its peculiar meter and rhyming qualities may be forgiven for a humorless misapplication of a nonexistent law. Perish forfend that someone should use a laptop computer in or near a public library.

Part of what I teach patrons about information literacy is to question the origin and the quality of the information they are given, particularly on the Web. In that spirit, then, do you perhaps have any proof of what you're saying? You could pretty much say anything you want, couldn't you?

I blogged this response, but Radio is refusing to publish it (hmmmm... conspiracy??). AKMA, I hope you go back to the Library and ask the librarians to research this. Good information starts with good sources!

At the rate things are going, you're lucky you weren't arrested for taking the pictures...

I was there in July and thankfully, I did not encounter any resistance. I was thrilled that the library provided a wireless signal. In fact, a cop walked by me and said nothing. Weird. I don't see why being inside the library would make any difference. If they are making the signal available in a public place, doesn't that carry over to the outdoors?

http://hollywoodlog.typepad.com/nickerblog/2004/07/faraway_land.html

Of course, Frank, it also has a long history as a haven for Friends. . . .

No such law exists as you've probably learned since then. Just another fine example of Cop behavior.

-MA Lawyer

Well, this appears to be 2 things from my perspective:
1. we are well on the slippery slope to a police state in this country,
2. laws (and lawyers) do not account for "common sense"

Yes friend AKMA, some of those Friends who found safe haven on Nantucket were very successful whalers. They were perhaps among the Quakers about whom it is said, "They came to the colonies to do good and did very well indeed!"

Not to mention that if you had an antenna you could use that library signal far enough away that even if someone figured you were doing something fishy, they would never guess that the library wifi was your target.

You know I feel sorry for you. If you wanted to fight them you could have wasted time in the county jail, until they got you a lawyer and then turn around and sue the police for harassment. But like the good law abiding citizen that you are, you tried not to resist the police or explain that they are full of it. Next time you need to find someone who is willing to spend a night in jail so that the problem get publicized and settled once and for all.

"you need to find someone who is willing to spend a night in jail so that the problem get publicized and settled once and for all."

Better yet, we need to find and elect some leaders who have the technical savvy and sense of civil liberty to turn this freight train around!

And just as a reminder, that presidential wannabe who once claimed to have "invented the internet", was also the driving force behind those infamous "clipper chips" and the privacy-invading key escrow technology in general. So, we'll have to look a bit further...

Whoever it was that suggested you fight the system by purposefully committing a felony AND THEN fighting the conviction is a damn idiot. If you want to fight the system, do so before risking going to jail if you lose.

Furthermore, the law is actually called "theft of service" and it is applicable to wireless networks. In addition, they could get you for trespass chattel, failure to obey a lawful order from a police officer, probably physical trespass, and I'm certain a slew of other laws. (You seldom break just one.)

There may be an argument that the library was inviting you to use its network by having an open access point, they obviously knew how to protect the access point. Also, they posted no signs outside to alert anyone they should not use the wireless outside the library; however, it could also be argued that your using the wireless outside while they were closed is much the same as a person committing breaking-in-entry by entering an unlocked house that isn't theirs.

I'm with you in believing that this one needs to be fought so we have a definitive answer on whether or not it's truly illegal but I say you should let some other idiot blaze this trail...

If in fact the officer was quoting a law that doesn't exist, or is clearly unrelated to the situation on order to intimidate, *he* is in violate of a raft of federal laws. You probably don't have legal recourse, but if he was quoting non-existant laws, you should let the city council know that you quite and peacfull enjoyment of their public grounds was disrupted without just cause. Really, you should write to the city council and let them know. They have a vested interest that this kind of thing not drive people out of their community. They may not care, but by telling them directly, you at least give them the choice to care.
- John

I'm sorry to suggest this, since it seems everyone is soooo focused on "rights", but perhaps the officer was enforcing a community want or need to keep _potential_ masses of people off the lawn in front of public access points.

Kicking you off the bench was probably the town's way of gently reminding you they don't want loitering outside of buildings. Perfectly legal and kudos to AKMA for not raising a fuss.

If they did not want people loitering outside of buildings, are the benches only there for decoration? Or perhaps you mean to suggest that the police officer thought AKMA might have not only wanted to enter the library's wifi network but also _break and enter_ the library building?

If they don't want you to "loiter" outside of the PUBLIC library, perhaps the bench should be removed altogether? Seem fairly silly to suggest he was loitering. Many people in my hometown sit outside of the public library to relax, read, use their laptop, etc. Sounds to me like AKMA just caught this officer in a bad mood or appeared suspicious. Can't fault the officer for using his instincts, even if they are misguided. He is human after all. The simple solution to this whole silly mess has already been stated. The library needs to remove the signs and just power down the wifi connection when they don't want people on it. Simple.

Firstly, as many others have pointed out, this officer was just being an asshat.

Secondly, if the library doesn't want people using their wifi hotspot after hours, they should plug the router into one of those light timers and program it so it turns on when the library is open and turns off the moment the doors lock for the night.

Thirdly, you could have argued the point (after the laptop was turned off) that it's pretty tough to "steal signal" from a public library that uses public tax dollars to operate and adverties itself as a wifi hotspot.

It's equivalent of you drinking from a bubbler and the officer comes along and says "Move along, before I charge you with 'theft of public resources'".

Might have asked the officer for his badge number and name. It also would be nice to know the name of the agent that had explained the law to him and when the agent was there explaining the law.
Getting the statute number would make it easy to look up. You did the right thing leaving, after all no reason to go to jail until your sure you can collect for false arrest and harrassment.

It's hard to believe you can be convicted of "theft of service" when the service is free. A very good argument can be made that an open port with no logon requirements is the same thing as a public fontain. Available to anyone who is thirsty and close enough to use it. If you don't want it used that way encode it and add some authentication. The timer is a very simple idea that can control access when the building is closed.

We can thank the terrorists for this paranoia. The terrorists use these kinds of sites to communicate. The Idea of forcing you in the building is to get you on security video. So after the emails are traced back to the library they go get the video and try and figure out who is the bad guy.

About the loitering thing;

No, sitting on a public bench is not loitering - and I'm sure I am using the word in the terribly non-legal sense.

However, the potential exists for dozens of people sitting OUTSIDE a PUBLIC building when the building is CLOSED accessing a FREE SERVICE. I'm sure the same thing goes for bathing in fountains (clothed or not) and sleeping in picnic shelters. There may or may not be specific laws against those practices, but the police will roust you just the same.

Matrix/Echelon needs to track all communications to people. Fixed net access makes that easy. Wireless makes it impossible. Probably what gestapo - or is it stazi? - are trying to do here. Stupid. I mean there are no less than five wireless AP's and a few open in my dank studio apt.

Abuse of power in any form should be protested. I would be most happy to call this police office, officer, and city council if the information is provided. The last thing we need is a bunch of badge carrying lone wolfs on another witch hunt!

Imagine if 20% of the passengers on the 9/11 planes were packing. There'd be little chance the terrorists would have gotten so far. Controversial but why did our forefathers write down explicitly the right to bear arms? They knew a thing or two more than most Americans today.

"Never Argue With An Idiot. He'll Drag You Down To His Level And Then Beat You With Experience."

The publishers of the Nantucket Times newspaper also publish a free magazine called N. and the August 12 issue has an article about Wi-Fi hunting (essentially wardriving). Basically, the article's writer documents his search for wi-fi hotspots around the island, one of which happens to be the Nantucket Atheneum (library). The writer (Grant Sanders) lists the library and Nantucket High School as free public spots "purposefully open to the public". I re-read the article after reading AKMA's experience and found no reference to laws governing the theft of radio signals. Sanders did acknowledge that "unauthorized access to private networks might be considered criminal theft akin to stealing signals from cable television connections".

Overall it is very curious that an officer would determine that using a laptop outside a public place was cause for controlling a persons behavior and movements. I wonder if the N. magazine article, appearing about a week or two before 'the incident' jarred the sensibilities of some of the more official and intolerant ack-landers. Perhaps the library itself asked the police to keep an eye on the front lawn. On my next trip up you can be sure I'll be planting myself in the same spot as AKMA.

Now, I've done a little research and let me say determining exactly what is legal and illegal is tough. Simply detecting networks appears to be totally legal, and well it should. Actually using a network, without permission, even for internet browsing only appears to be illegal. In AKMA's case, the signal broadcast by the library has been publicized as publically accessible, open to all. As the owner of the network the library may institute whatever rules or limitations it likes, from dictating that users not download illegal material to requiring that network users must be inside the library building. Is this very silly given the easy tools available for controlling a wireless network - yes. Does this sort of mentality treat people like little children and foster a general sense of paranoia - again, yes.

What is not silly but probably a civil rights violation is a cop asking a person to move off public property without evidence of wrong doing. It boggles the mind.

Overall the legal issues surrounding the term 'wireless network' are only just beginning to be sorted out and codified. Some people leave their wireless connections open in a spirit of sharing. How is a would-be surfer to know whether a connection is okay to use or not?

In my opinion, AKMA did nothing wrong but was wronged by an authority abusing cop.

Makes me proud to be an American, eh?

How does one become a citizen of another country? I am going to out-source my patriotism!

Take it easy but take it. Bob

Your entry made slashdot, congradulations. I agree with whoever said that you should contact the city council, and also have asked for the officer's badge number and name. He certainly had no business accosting you after you turned off your wireless card. You were sitting on a public bench, using an FCC approved electronic device that was your legal property. The simple fact that you could access the network does not mean you were. That is like asking someone to leave a public place because their presence there allows them to hurt someone or vandalize something. Such is far from legal.

Hmmmm....
I think I'll get a policeman to arrest all my neighbors that accidently scan for an SSID and it shows up on their computer, even if they DON'T try to cinnect. The fact that they received the SSID maintains the ever so slight possibility that they may connect. And if I am doing something illegal on my computer, they have just become accomplices.

So to the gallows with them all!
I'll be somewhere on an Island in the South Pacific when I turn in my neighbors!

Wouldn't they need a warrant to search your laptop to see if you were accessing the WiFi signal? :)

Actually it's a pretty simple task to remove it from the bar so they couldn't even take a glance at it. Someone will make a hack soon to make an icon to look like the WiFi is off...

I agree. Anything paid by the Public should be able to be used by the Public. And I believe "Theft of Service" has to do with actually breaching a container, such as an encrypted card, a secure ID, a scrambler circuit, etc. Kinda like de-scrambling Direct Tv by hacking the card. Since absolutely no RF signal can be contained unless it's enshrouded in lead, because it will bounce and breach structures according to it's frequency characteristics, the only container can be a security block; such as an user ID or Key. Since there was not one, the signal was open to reception by the public and to be used. And since the signal can be picked up, even off the Library grounds and public property, that could constitute radio signal pollution. Which there are FCC laws about. That is why 2-way satellite has be aimed exactly right, with the right power, because it will screw up other peoples' signal if it is not, or overload the satellite transponders. Anywho, that cop was typical of most all police officers today, a corrupted, ignorant , jackass. Why does society keep rewarding the stupid with more power? I would do something about that cop to get him reprimanded. Your situation was somewhat harmless, but think about the next person he encounters and what that situation could be. It might be life altering and to someone who can't afford to defend themselves with a lawyer. The more negative remarks go on that cops' record, the more of a chance the next person, who isn't in that cops' good favor, will have to defend themselves if he wrongfully arrests them.