I see previous thread closed already

[markgriffith]

Thanks for your replies to my WiFi question. As I'm in Budapest in a block of flats, I wouldn't mind knowing how to contact the person whose bandwidth I'm using.

We're supposed to be getting an Internet connection of our own, but I can see this taking a long time, given that this is Hungary. Our landlord, who is a sweet man more efficient than most here, took a whole two months to repaper our flat after water poured down the walls from an upstairs aparment in November, for example.

I assume in the meantime [however long the meantime will be....] finding the person whose WiFi I can access and offering to split their bill would be good - but how can I do this?

If you can spell it out technically, I'd be grateful.

[Saracen]

I can't think of any easy methods, unless something in the name gives it away. If it's 'johnhome', for instance, do you have a neighbour called John?

Other than that, you can use a directional antenna to do a triangulation, and signal strength meters to narrow down range, and they'll certainly narrow the field for you. After that, it's probablty a case of knocking on doors.

Unless anyone else has a better idea?

[JPreston]

Yes I thought it odd that the other thread is locked. For all anyone knows, there is nothing illegal or against T&Cs about sharing connections in Hungary.

Don't mess about with technological solutions. Just get out and knock on doors. You should make friends with your neighbours anyway

[Saracen]

Yes I thought it odd that the other thread is locked. For all anyone knows, there is nothing illegal or against T&Cs about sharing connections in Hungary.

Sharing in this country isn't an offence, providing the person providing the service knows he's sharing. It's unauthorised access that's dodgy. Though, of course, many ISPs ban it in the T&Cs.

As for why it was closed, well, it's a UK-based forum. Firstly, in the absence of being told it's taking place in Hungary a reasonable assumption is it's in the UK. Secondly, there are many situations where you can have legal liability for discussing things in the UK even if the act itself is in another country. For example, there's an increasing tendency for people in the US to sue in the UK using defamation laws, even though the person allegedly doing the defaming and the person allegedly being defamed are both in the US. So why sue in the UK? Because the fact that remarks on the Internet art published in the UK if a UK reader reads them (hence causing them to be published) gives UK courts jurisdiction if they chose to exercise it, and UK law better suits the plaintiff in that situation than US law. And the above applies even if the person being accused didn't intend it to be published in the UK and the UK was not even the target audience for the remarks or website.

So, we have a situation that is likely to be illegal in the UK, being discussed on a UK-based service. Are Hexus supposed to consult lawyers every time to determine whether something can drop them in the poop or not? Or just err on the safe side and stop/delete stuff they aren't sure of?

Common sense suggests they'll err on the safe side rather than take unnecessary risks. So closing it MAY not have been necessary .... but if unsure about the legality, it certainly is sensible.

[TheAnimus]

Finding wireless access points, net stumbler is probably the best, i've not done this with a laptop in ages.

WiFiFoFum is just the best, but for PDAs/Phones only:
http://www.aspecto-software.com/rw/a...ons/wififofum/

[chicken]

I had a similar situation, but the neighbours' WiFi seemed to be taking out ours as whenever theirs was on (they kept turning it off at night) ours stopped working.

I found the name of the router still set to the default belkin54g, went online and found a manual, got the default login and IP address and logged into it. In there I found an ADSL username & password page where the person's surname was used in the username. I looked it up in the phone book but it appeared to be a good few streets away so I'm not sure that was right.

I resolved the issue eventually but I'm not going to go into how. I got close, but never found out who the person was. As for neighbours it wasn't our closest and there were a lot of houses behind ours so it could've been anyone.

What speed does it connect? Might give you some idea on distance.

Also I know the services you mention are blocked on mobile internet use here sometimes, but in Hungary I have no idea!

[markgriffith]

Thanks for the suggestions, everyone. I think knocking on doors is the way to go - I just know so little about WiFi and computers, I initially thought there might be a way to work it out on the laptop itself.

The name of the involuntary host is 'SMC' which doesn't tell me much. One person suggested I slip notes under the doors of everyone on my landing and the floor above and below telling them someone had a security breach and I could help them sort it out - this sounds quite feasible, as long as I work out how to do the helping bit. Probably I just look through their security preferences...?

The signal is very strong, so I assume they are nearby.

I can understand why my previous thread was locked, really - lawyers are a dangerous bunch, I know. Or perhaps not lawyers, so much as litigious clients.

Splitting the cost of the involuntary host's WiFi might work out well, since my flatmate is now saying she doesn't want to use the Internet at home after all....

[Saracen]

....

I can understand why my previous thread was locked, really - lawyers are a dangerous bunch, I know. Or perhaps not lawyers, so much as litigious clients.

Indeed. From my moderating experience both here (in the past) and elsewhere, I can say that deciding whether to close and/or delete something that's a bit close to the mark is always a tricky decision. Most people don't like it when it happens, and sometimes people get very uppity about it, but it usually comes down to what I said about not taking chances.

Hexus (both staff and membership) are usually pretty good about this. Hexus don't close stuff unnecessarily, and the membership generally understands (and you're a good example of that) when they do.

When someone does get annoyed, though, my usual response is to invite them to consider how they'd react if it were their forum, and if they faced the situation where even defending themselves in court could cost thousands or tens of thousands of pounds, even if they win..... and it was their home potentially on the line, win or lose. If they lose, depending on the situation, it could be MUCH more than that. Ask Demon Internet ... the Godfrey case reputedly cost them about 3/4 million.

There's two sides to the law. One is what the law actually says, and the other is the practical inferences of getting caught up in it. In this country, as in most, the law is still largely a tool (even the weapon) of the wealthy, and Joe Public is hard pushed to use, or even defend against it. And that is what drives many forum decisions. It's easy to say "if you're in the right, defend it in court" if you don't have to face the legal bills in the (usually unlikely) event that it came to that.

It sure makes a Mods life interesting, and a forum owner's far more so .... and nervous.

This is why the forum I ran was actually owned and operated by a limited company, formed explicitly for the purpose, together with the cost and administrative hassle (gawd, the hassle ) of doing so.

[redlight]

You dont have to go Wardriving near me I can pickup six networks in my house. Not all at the same time my Netgear GD834GT picks up 2 sometimes 3 and if I move room to room with my laptop with its WG511GT wireless card I can find 3 more. I know who they belong to one of them is the village local. The rest are neighbours two of which I have actually gone to there house and told them to secure their network. They did not have a clue about the risks.

[Saracen]

.... The rest are neighbours two of which I have actually gone to there house and told them to secure their network.

As with my neighbour, who was runnig a totally unsecured link. Not even WEP was turned on.

He's a network adminsitrator by profession. He went a funny kind of red colour when I told him.

[markgriffith]

Goodness. Sounds very unpleasant, Saracen.

You're probably extremely busy, but if you had time, I'm curious what happened in the Demon Internet Godfrey case you mention.

Demon used to do a very good service of delivering e-mails to fax machines in Britain [by attaching an advert to your e-mail/fax] but they seem to have stopped doing that recently, or tightened up somehow in some way I don't understand. Perhaps that came from legal threats too?

Interesting point about law being a weapon of the rich. Just yesterday I saw a video I had linked to taken off YouTube - not a copyright problem, I think [the owner of the video wanted it to be on there], so much as some kind of defamation threat. As far as I can understand....

[Saracen]

Well, briefly ....

Someone posted a Newsgroup message purportedly by Dr Laurence Godfrey. It was a fake, and Dr Godfrey held it to be defamatory.

Demon Internet hosted a newsgroup mirror which contained the statements. Dr Godfrey, as a respected academic, had a reputation that could be, and it was argued, was damaged. He wrote to Demon Internet requesting that the defamatory posting be removed from their servers.

Demon did not do so, and the post evenutally expired in the normal way.

Godfrey sued, and Demon maintained that they were not liable as they were not the publishers, and that even if the were, they could rely on a principle called "innocent dissemination", and that they had no duty to monitor or edit newsgroups. Arguably, they'd be much more liable if they did do so.

The arguments were fairly technical, but the upshot was Demon lost. I don't think the final settlement ever became public, but I've certainly seen suggestions that damages were fairly small (£15,000 or so), but that Dr Godfrey's legal costs were paid by Demon and were estimated to be in excess of £200,000 and Demon's costs were estimated at be much higher than that.

Anyway, the salient points, I guess, is that Demon didn't originate the case, and didn't generate the defamatory statement. All they did was decline to remove it, and it cost them a LOT of money to defend themselves, and all because someone else who was never found (IIRC) posted the original fake remarks. Demon were, effectivewly, a bystander that got caught up in someone else's prank.

This is why many, even most, Internet "publishers" fight shy of anything remotely resembling defamation. Unless you have strong principles and very deep pockets, it's a chance most feel isn't worth taking.

If you need details, just do a search on Laurence Godfrey, Demon and defamation.

[markgriffith]

Ooh dear. Yes, I see.

[Saracen]

Ooh dear. Yes, I see.

Scary, init?

Many people don't realise that just 'cos it's the net, you can't avoid legal liability for what you say. It applies to posts on a forum, it applies to blogs and it may well apply to emails. That's one reason why many companies have very firm policies on using company facilities on forums, and on controls over what email can be used for, and why it's often deemed 'gross misconduct' if you break them. If, for instance, you say something defamatory about person x (maybe a client, for instance) and you send it to just one other person (that isn't client x), it would be grounds for a defamation claim if client x ever found out about it and could prove it. You, and probably your employer, could be liable. And as your employer is likely to have deeper pockets than you, it's more liable to be the target of an action.

The point about sending it to someone other than the client is important, though. I could tell you, to your face, that you were (for example) a thief, or paedophile, or goat-nobbler, or whatever, and it isn't defamation because it needs to be 'published', and telling the person I refer to isn't publication. But if I tell just one third party that about you, it's 'published', and potentially defamation. There's other elements needed for defamation to stick, but you get the idea of how it can happen.

Anyway, this is going a bit off the point, but it's always a concern to someone running something like a forum (and usually scares them clear out of their knickers when they first find out about it ), which is why most mods/admins tend to take a lock/delete view first, if in doubt, and worry about it afterwards.