A question for people who know more about laws than I do
-
In 2008 a judge in the Netherlands ruled that using someone elses wifi isn't stealing, because "bandwidth and data aren't goods". Why then does the same principle not extend to software piracy? It's still just data, right?
Main Problem is Law is slow and Tech is fast, and the law hasn't caught up yet. Also, the law is made piecemeal, and therefore is not smooth and comprehensive.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave CCC Link[^] Trolls[^]
-
Main Problem is Law is slow and Tech is fast, and the law hasn't caught up yet. Also, the law is made piecemeal, and therefore is not smooth and comprehensive.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave CCC Link[^] Trolls[^]
-
In 2008 a judge in the Netherlands ruled that using someone elses wifi isn't stealing, because "bandwidth and data aren't goods". Why then does the same principle not extend to software piracy? It's still just data, right?
-
it should at least have been treated as a service since it is paid for.
Join the cool kids - Come fold with us[^]
-
Private law still applies of course (if there is any damage anyway, which seems unlikely given that everyone has flatrate broadband these days), all it meant was that tapping into someone's wireless isn't a criminal offense
-
David1987 wrote:
everyone has flatrate broadband these days
___________________________________________ .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
-
Sorry - missed the question mark. Everyone doesn't
___________________________________________ .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
-
Maybe not in the outback, but here 92% do and the rest doesn't have internet at all. There is no such thing as non-flatrate broadband here and no one except a small handful of grandma's uses dial-up anymore.
David1987 wrote:
but here 92% do and the rest doesn't have internet at all.
OK - I wasn't aware of your location - but the Netherlands are unusual in that they have the highest use per capita in europe.
David1987 wrote:
There is no such thing as non-flatrate broadband here
But is it all you can eat - or is it capped?
___________________________________________ .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
-
David1987 wrote:
but here 92% do and the rest doesn't have internet at all.
OK - I wasn't aware of your location - but the Netherlands are unusual in that they have the highest use per capita in europe.
David1987 wrote:
There is no such thing as non-flatrate broadband here
But is it all you can eat - or is it capped?
___________________________________________ .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
Basically all you can eat, with a "fair usage" 'cap'. I'm not really sure what that's supposed to mean, but I've used 0.8TB bandwidth in a single month (which is unusual for me, usually it's only about 0.3TB) October last year and that was OK. So I think that "fair usage" limit is just there so they have something they can slap users that are causing congestion with.