On Wed, 2009-03-04 at 15:12 -0500, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
* Jim Henderson
[03-04-09 14:36]: On Wed, 04 Mar 2009 13:19:29 -0500, Greg Freemyer wrote:
If true, then every coffee shop, McDonalds, bookstore, hotel etc. would have liability for the activities of their wireless users. That just does not seem to be true, or they would not be offering wireless connections.
This actually varies from state to state. IANAL or a computer forensics expert, but I know here in Utah there have been laws proposed that would make the provider of open wireless systems liable for the actions of users. It's been a topic of discussion in Pete Ashdown's blog because his company (XMission) provides free Wifi at many locations throughout the city, and if the law passes, he's going to have to shut that service down because he can't afford to defend against potential suits that say he didn't do enough to protect kids from being able to surf to undesirable sites.
Because - as COPA has demonstrated so very well - you can never to *enough*. It just takes one person getting through to a site that wasn't properly blacklisted and you've got to defend yourself.
Isn't it ridiculous that we have come to the point that you are the guilty party when you fail to protect yourself and/or your property from another's transgressions. You are guilty because you have availed someone the opportunity to commit a crime.
Isn't this really just the absurd extension of suing someone because you were hurt while pulling a B&E on their property? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org