logo

Why You Should Secure Your Wireless Network


NORTHAMPTON, Mass. (WGGB) — A court case filed in Massachusetts District Court on Monday accuses a group of 15 defendants of negligence of their wireless networks.

“They allowed the network to be open, they allowed this illegal activity to occur so they were negligent and should be held liable,” said Attorney Marvin Cable — an attorney of one of the defendants. “Even though they did not directly download it [themselves].”

Because this case is of first impression, the outcome of this case may determine whether operating an open wifi router is per se negligent, making open wifi operators liable for the illegal use of the open wifi users.

The claims filed in court on Monday are an addendum to the case. The precedent will affect the outcome of many trials to come.

WGGB encourages readers to share their thoughts and engage in healthy dialogue about the issues. Comments containing personal attacks, profanity, offensive language or advertising will be removed. Please use the report comment function for any posts you feel should be reviewed. Thank you.

  • kevin

    Is this a civil case? Any one know any more info

  • Deb

    I hate these suits. People need to be held responsible for their own actions rather than ‘blaming’ everyone else.
    Who is liable for drunk driving deaths? The town or state because the road was ‘driveable’?

  • ken

    This is ridiculous.. there’s no way any of the defendants should be held liable .. its not their fault someone else broke the law.. its like saying if you leave your car unlocked and someone steals it and commits a crime that you’ll be resposible.. our legal system is corrupt and needs to not waste time and money on these obsurb cases.. usually when you buy a router there’s no instructions on how to password your network or people just don’t have the capacity to do so.. the defendents should countersue for harassment or sue there internet provider or there WiFi router manufacturer

  • http://marvincable.com Marvin Cable

    kevin, here is the link to the complaint: bit.ly/wifineg

  • Sanjiv Reej

    That Marvin Cable lawyer guy must be some kind of genius. Very interesting legal precedent at stake here.

  • CTVic

    Wait … Marvin Cable is representing a defendant?
    And he’s just rolling over, saying they’re liable when they get hacked?!
    Not even a fight, not even an argument. Nothing about the ease of hacking wi-fi, or the difficulty in securing it? Hell, when push comes to shove, it just takes one person 5 minutes with two alligator clips to hack into a customer’s wired network. Come get them, too! Boy, Marvin Cable is some kind of wonder lawyer, isn’t he?
    I’m sure he’ll find a lot of clients when he’s known for saying “Hey, no problemo. Come sue the shit outta my clients! They’re all yours!”

  • http://marvincable.com Marvin Cable

    You have no idea what your talking about. The editing was horrible. I was saying what the plaintiffs argument was, not providing my argument. I would appreciate an apology.

  • Anonymous

    If the editing is indeed as bad as it appears the reporter needs to issue a retraction and apology.

    No way a defense attorney would say that. I’ll bet he was stating the plaintiff’s argument and the reporter purposefully edited it out of context to stir things up.

  • Trevor

    never mind the file pirates… go after the butt pirates. they ought to prosecute the film maker for producing this gay porn.