Originally Posted by Draigas
I disagree with that. It is not the same as leaving your door open and someone entering. because the signal extends beyond the range of their property. If you leave your valuable in the middle of the street or vacant lot across the street (not your yard), it is considered abandoned and there for up for grabs.
If the signal did not leave his property and the user had to actually sit in the guys yard or driveway to get the signal then I would agree, but such is not the case.
And being wireless makes me think about cellphones which has always had more leinent laws on tapping than a land line.
But in any case if it goes beyond his property then it is either public or the onus is on him to secure it.
<<< ...Cannot BELIEVE ppl are STILL debating this… obviously they’re NOT readin’ the entire thread… >>>
LOL! Whether you agree with it or not is meaningless, it’s the law… obviously you haven’t studied law… the air waves, for the most part, belong to the public in a manner similar to our highways… I dare you to “grab” a vehicle that is left (“abandoned” according to you) along the highway and convert it to your personal use. You can be convicted of a criminal violation (a felony) and you can be sued in a civil action.
Your use of the conventional definition of abandonment shows your ignorance of the law. The law has its own definitions which are sometimes quite different from those we use in everyday conversation.
In law, abandonment requires two elements. 1) the intention
to abandon and 2) the act
of abandonment itself. If you have to leave your vehicle beside the highway because it won’t run or something similar, a reasonable
person would assume that you intend to retrieve it at some future time. btw, reasonable is the most widely used word in law. I recommend you remember to apply it in almost all legal situations.
Legally, if you intend to leave your newspaper in a waiting room and leave it, that’s abandonment. If you leave it but don’t intend to, then you have not abandoned it.
About cellular phone tapping laws being more lenient than conventional land lines, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of North Carolina was charged with taping a cellular conversation. He pleaded guilty because he knew he would be convicted.
I’m offering the following to any of you that really want to engage in a meaningful debate about law, duty, rights, etc. this is the kind of question that would be asked in law school.
What is the difference between false imprisonment and kidnapping?
Hint: it can be expressed in one word if you are familiar with law - that would be the only acceptable answer in law school...