<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by robb:
Well, it's your responsbility to see to which networks you are connecting. There is a setting in you wifi card configuration that asks if you want to connect automatically to non-preferred networks. You should leave this set to "No" so that you never accidentally choose a strange network.
With this setting at no, you may get a message saying that one or more wireless networks are avilable, but you actively have to select one to connect to it.</font>
I should probably have added that I personally have the technical ability to know all the above and to prevent my computer from automatically attaching to unsecure networks - presumably it is safe to attach to secure networks because the fact that I know the key for it implies that it is the "correct" network. BTW, I think this setting is only available automatically in Windows XP. 2000 did not have built-in support for wireless networks and you were dependent on the connection utilities provided by the NIC vendor.
I am more interested in the implications regarding the original question in the thread - that is, the legal or moral implications. To reiterate, people are saying that it may be the case that the notebook user is engaging in unauthorized use of the access point's network and internet connection. That may be true, but by the same token, the access point owner has captured the NIC of the notebook user without authorization.
My position is more forceful than the "hey, you left your access point unsecured, so you have no grounds for complaining that people are using it without your permission". I say "Hey, you set you access point to capture all unsecure NIC's. Some people have to leave their NIC's unsecure because they utilize unsecure public or private NIC's. You are capturing their NIC's without their permission and are in the wrong for that."