ST: Wi-Fi thief pleads guilty December 20, 2006
Posted by Enigma in : General , trackback , printSo, the verdict is finally out. The 17 year-old guy had really been charged just for a simple act of wifi mooching. Simple as that. So what really happened is that, the guy was bored, went out to mooch, noticed by a kay-poh neighbour who then called the police even when the wifi-network didn’t belong to him/her?
I am not sure if the Neighbourhood Watch program has evolutionized in the digital age, but… er, do you go around peering over people’s shoulder and finding out if they are mooching?
Anonymous neighbour (AN): “Hey boy, what are you doing?”
Boy: “Nothing….”
AN: “Huh? What nothing? What are you doing with your computer? You trying to hack is it?”
Boy: “No… I am just surfing net”
AN: “Huh? What surfing net? Show me, boy. Show me what you are surfing? Porn right? You surfing porn right?”
Boy: “No… I am just surfing net…”
AN: “What surfing net? You don’t tell me, I go tell pooolice”
Boy: “Don’t want… Hey, don’t like that leh…”
AN: “Why? You scared liao is it, huh? Now what time already? 3am liao and sitting outside by the road… must be up to nothing do. Save your story for the men in blue….”
*dials 999*
AN: “Hello… police ah? Ya… I tell you hor… now got 1 boy sit….”
*boy snatches the phone but forgot to turn it off*
AN: (screams out loud) “We are at xxxxxxxxx now, quick quick come!” ^_^”‘
Okie… the conversation at the top is fictional… but I am not sure how many of us would confront someone sitting by the roadside at 3am to find out if he’s surfing@linksys or wireless@sg .
Would you do it? (asking people which network they are on, I mean)
Article quoted from the Straits Times Interactive, for archving purposes
THE 17-year-old youth charged with illegally ‘mooching’ on a home wireless network admitted the offence yesterday - and promised not to do it again.
Taking him up on that, District Judge Bala Reddy asked Garyl Tan Jia Luo, who left Republic Polytechnic about two months ago, if he was willing to enlist for national service early as a way to stay out of mischief.
Tan agreed, after which Judge Reddy called for a pre-sentence report.
This report may lead to probation for Tan, which would spare him from having a criminal record. Historically, the courts have never offered probation to people convicted of computer-crime cases.
News of Tan’s case first broke last month when The Straits Times reported that he had become the first person here to be charged with accessing an unsecured wireless network.
This practice has been dubbed ‘wireless mooching’.
Tan, neatly dressed in a white polo shirt, was in the community court yesterday.
He pleaded guilty to the activity, an offence under the Computer Misuse Act.
According to Deputy Public Prosecutor Toh Shin Hao’s presentation to the court, Tan had been feeling bored one night seven months ago and badly wanted to surf the Internet.
But his mother had locked up his modem to stop him from spending too much time online.
So, the tech-savvy youth took his notebook computer outside his Casuarina Walk home, to find an unsecured wireless network on which he could mooch.
His computer located one such network nearby and he was spotted surfing by a neighbour who was driving past.
Suspicious of what Tan, sitting by the roadside at 3am, was doing with his computer, the neighbour confronted him.
This culminated in an argument, after which the neighbour called the police.
Tan’s lawyer, Mr Sam Koh, said the young man was ‘deeply remorseful’ over his ‘foolish and immature’ actions.
He also asked for a minimum fine for Tan, which Judge Reddy turned down, asking if Mr Koh really wanted Tan to have a criminal record at such a young age.
If Tan were fined, he would have a criminal record.
That was when Judge Reddy asked Tan about the enlistment possibility.
Judge Reddy had - when sentencing a 21-year-old to jail for illegally distributing MP3 music files earlier this year - noted that probation was an unsuitable punishment in computer crime cases, as it left defendants at a loose end, which could lead to them re-offending.
By calling for this report, it appears that Judge Reddy is considering probation for Tan, coupled with an early enlistment to make sure he does not re-offend.
Speaking to reporters later, Mr Koh said he had asked for a fine for Tan on his family’s instructions.
Tan could have faced penalties of up to three years’ jail and a $10,000 fine.
Comments»
I think now the mother would probably just let her son surf the web at home… Guess the modem would not be locked up again. But hor, now with wireless@sg, think he’ll just go to town and surf… legally. :p
wah lao
the neighbour also bloody one kind lor…
what the hell..
nowsaday ah… sit downstair use computer people also call police
what happened to good old fashion smoking and drinking?… i think nowsaday, use computer in void deck is worse then that ah…
the boy also abit gong, should just keep quiet let them call the police… then when police some…. say he doing homework, police also cannot say anything… sit downstairs use computer also not not against the law…
The neighbour must be eat finish no shit put. The boy should’ve called the police and said: this person ah, 3am liao still driving st here. I think he is very suspicious. wahahaha
Stupid Singaporeans. How can accessing an unsecure point be against the law. Let’s say I setup my AP as “SingaporeSux-1″ and my neighbour also setup his point as “SingaporeSux-1″. Sekali the stoopid bangra-desh maid pull out my plug and my PC not yet finish download by porn, suddenly it reconnect to my neighbour AP is consider a crime?
The lawyer seems to “catch no ball” in this case. The fellas problem is that he got a bad lawyer only.
only in Singapore this kind of things will happen.
what kind of neighbour is that?
think about what is the main reason (regardless of the law) why each connection to the internet needs to be verifiable with the person that paid for the connection?