An Ethical Question
O great readers of attb, help me sort through an ethical question I’ve debated with several recently (not sure of my own answer!). Wi-Fi is in the air all around us, and for those of us who have laptops with Wi-Fi cards, it’s a nice treat to find a Wi-Fi hotspot. Sometimes we find these at advertised locations, but sometimes, if we have our wi-fi button turned on, we find the air filled with a nice-enough signal to connect. Question: is it unethical to tap into a wi-fi network that one happens to find by accident, effectively? Is it more like TV in the old days; the air is filled with signals, and you can tap in if you choose? Is it more like stealing cable? Can anyone be said to be harmed by this? Does this cross an ethical line, and if so, where is that line? I’m truly interested in this answer…and what I’m interested in is an ethical answer, not a justification (which we seem to be so prone to do today—Napster in its early days was a temptation to which many folks gave in). So don’t tell me “everybody’s doing it” or the rough equivalent thereof. I don’t want to know what everyone else does, nor what I can get away with—that I already know. What I want help with is ethical thinking here…
This phrase comes from the 1978 "Jonestown massacre" in which most members of the Peoples Temple cult, blindly following their leader Jim Jones, committed suicide by drinking cyanide-laced Kool-Aid.
Osborne: A Contrarian's Guide to Knowing God
Schlossberg: Idols For Destruction
14 Responses to “An Ethical Question”
Well, the effects of plugging one more computer into a network, are that the computer at the bottleneck feels it and has to take the load.
http://www.sptimes.com/2005/07/04/State/Wi_Fi_cloaks_a_new_br.shtml
According to this, it’s considered theft, no different than if i started bootlegging Microsoft cd’s.
Aaron ~ Sep 14, 2005 at 2:46 pm
“accidentally”?????
Ahem, I’m sorry, I accidentally turned on my computer and accidentally noticed I had internet and accidentally typed in http://www.byron-harvey.com and accidentally noticed this thread about WiFi and accidentally posted…….
Okay, you might, by accident, discover you have access to WiFi, but you don’t accidentally USE it now, do you?
Sherry ~ Sep 14, 2005 at 3:13 pm
I don’t know if this has been challenged legally.
For myself, I did this in the Hong Kong airport in July. I couldn’t find a way to pay for Internet (which worked in June). I did find that in one of the restaurants I could access a un-encrypted open WIFI network. I used it to Skype my family to let them know I had arrived safely.
One wrinkle in this is that simple encryption is hard to break and easy to apply.
Mark Olson ~ Sep 14, 2005 at 5:58 pm
Oh. I don’t mean to imply that legal is the same as ethical. But in this case (theft of service) legal and ethical might be closer intertwined than in others.
Mark Olson ~ Sep 14, 2005 at 5:59 pm
No, I don’t “accidentally” use it; I’ve done that on purpose, equating it, as I said, to the idea of the airwaves being open, much like TV. I ask the question because I’m not so sure anymore.
As to Mark’s situation, I’m not sure that an ethical line would be crossed there, even if we do decide that, in general, doing it crosses a line. He looked for a way to find pay internet; didn’t find it; needed to contact family; used it for that sole purpose; got off (I assume). Not sure I would have any problem under similar circumstances with that, irrespective of what we ultimately decide here…
Byron ~ Sep 14, 2005 at 8:15 pm
Interesting St. Pete Times article. Of course, I’m not talking about using it for any nefarious ends, but that article basically says that it is illegal to do it. Hmmm…
Byron ~ Sep 14, 2005 at 8:20 pm
Would it matter whether or not you are doing it for good or bad reasons?
Under normal circumstances, shoplifting is a crime whether I do it for the thrill, to re-sell for money, or because I’m poor and hungry. (I say under normal circumstances in order to avoid a discussion of looting after Katrina right/wrong when people are starving)
As for Mark’s usage in the airport – I guess I would look at it this way, I personally don’t have a laptop – I have traveled overseas, and so I have found other ways to let my family know I have arrived safely. Was there no phone? Was it imperative that they know at that time or could it have waited for a hotel? My point being that even though Mark looked for a way to pay for the internet usage, he didn’t find it. Can I just leave a store with merchandise if no cashier is to be seen? (Now it is possible that the WiFi WAS there for his usage, we don’t know…)
This isn’t like broadcast TV, broadcast TV is paid for by advertising and designed specifically to be used for “free”. WiFi is sold, along with methods to keep others from freeloading. Isn’t that alone enough to decide that using it w/o paying is stealing?
Sherry ~ Sep 15, 2005 at 10:04 am
Good points, Sherry; I’m processing at this point. Mulling analogy of shoplifting; it’s very clear that loss is occuring in that case; a little less clear in my scenario. I mean, is it theft if I read a newspaper bought by someone else? It could be said that I’m depriving the Post-Gazette of a sale, but I don’t think that anyone really considers that unethical…
Interestingly enough, we’re about to get DSL, I think, and the shoe will be on the other foot, when I get a router and begin accessing via Wi-Fi personally!
Byron ~ Sep 15, 2005 at 11:37 am
Let’s say it’s *my* Post-Gazette, and you pick it up off my doorstep w/o asking permission, read it, fold it up carefully and return it. Is that a good thing to do? Or what if, you are in the store, and you read the Post-Gazette in the checkout line, fold it up, and return it before you pay, is that alright?
Perhaps you are thinking of a paper you find on the park bench, well, in that case, permission to read it has effectively been given by the person who left it behind on the park bench. So it is not stealing from the original owner or the newspaper. But this is not the scenario we’re discussing, is it?
I don’t think, in the case of WiFi, you are stealing it from the company *as much as* you’re stealing it from the person who is purchasing the service. As with cable, if you run a line from the pole to your house you’re stealing from the company, but if you run a splitter from your neighbor, you’re stealing it from them as well(thier signal is diminished, and as mentioned earlier you can create a problem with the quality of service from WiFi with multiple users also)
I don’t think you’re analogy is quite clear enough. I had a discussion with a woman about napster…she claimed it was no different from reading a book borrowed from someone else….the differene there is when you borrow a book you don’t COPY it, and with napster you have COPIED it. There’s a big difference. Well there’s a difference between reading a paper I bought with my permission and daily sneaking it off my doorstep. Especially if it takes me longer to get my paper while you’re busy reading it over your morning cofee…..
Sherry ~ Sep 15, 2005 at 12:40 pm
Sorry, Sherry, but your analogy breaks down entirely. I don’t drink coffee!
Byron ~ Sep 15, 2005 at 2:24 pm
Yeahyeahyeah….I like to change the subject too whenever I lose a debate….
Sherry ~ Sep 15, 2005 at 3:38 pm
Yeahyeahyeah….I like to change the subject too whenever I lose a debate….
yunzer jus’ cranky cuz yunz can’t use yer free WiFi anymores! bwa ha ha haaaaaaaaa!
Sherry ~ Sep 15, 2005 at 3:40 pm
Whoops! Sorry there, I’ve gone from having to have my thoughts e-mailed to you to for post to posting willy-nilly!
Sherry ~ Sep 15, 2005 at 3:42 pm