February 7th, 2007

Anymore FON and WiFi Mooching


Thanks to the article on Digital Life yesterday, I received numerous email inquiries about me giving away FONs. If you come to here looking for FON, I am sorry to inform you that that was a few months back and I don’t have any FON left. However, I might be able to get some more later but it will cost me money. So if you don’t mind paying for it, drop me an email at james@seng.sg and I will add you to the list.

Do take note that sharing your wifi might not be illegal but it is likely to be against the terms and conditions of your providers. For example, Singtel has this clauses “Each SingNet BroadBand account is valid for a single user, who applies with a residential line, to login to a single connection session, and not for multiple concurrent logins. If multiple concurrent logins are detected, SingNet reserves the right to impose a fee on the user for each multiple session login at prevailing monthly subscription rates.”

The story started because Hian Hou needed a quote on a story on WiFi mooching a few weeks back and while we chat on the phone, I mentioned FON to him.

Seriously, I couldn’t believe we still talking over mooching. I just saw another rebuttal on the papers today again. You know what? I know “everyone” do it (mooching) but that does not make it alright.

Mooching is like trespassing in real life. You see that nice patch of grass with a “private property sign”, no gates, open space. The shortest way to your destination is to walk across the grass. Do you walk across it? Most people would but if the owner see you, he can haul you to court for trespassing. Thats the for wireless network. The laws protect private citizen property and space. It is ridiculous to expect the laws to state otherwise, regardless of the social norm.

We walk across the grass and if we are catch, we apologies and that normally settles it. Anyone asked why the kid was haul all the way to court? He could have say sorry when the owner catch him. The investigation officer could have mediate it before it goes on to prosecution. The prosecutor could have stop it before it goes to court. But no, it went all the way to court. So why did the owner insist going all the way? What pissed him off so much? And no, I dont think it is over a few bits and bytes.

Comments are closed.