[wsfii-discuss] It is treating Wi-Fi as communal property when itis not.....

[Ramon Roca]

Yes, until now, Fon has been quite successfull in hitting popular press,
in fact is thei only success by nuw, it's not out of the context, is *the*
context where fon is interested in to help them in capturing attention,
and later on, VC.

Take in mind that in reality, fon still does not exists, or at least there
are a quite larger communities already sharing internet (breaking laws?).
I don't think is the right word, i.e. at guifi.net we have links with many
municipalties, even churchs...

About if wifi is comunal or not, not sure about what's the right word, but
certainly I'm reluctant to accept that unlicensed bands and open air
outside the homes can be capitalized as a private property and treated as
an object of especulation. I can't imagine walls on the air. Nothing wrong
if there are investments looking for increasing wifi universal coverage,
also OK if that's another marketing trick for some ISP to sell more,
but... what's really that about? Let's wait and see..., and in the
meantine continue to grow and make stronger real world communities. We are
not vaporware, they are who have to proof what they are and have.



>
> On Feb 7, 2006, at 3:09 PM, Karel Kulhavy wrote:
>
>> What is breaking the law? Free networks or Fon? Where is the proof
>> that law is broken?
>
> I think he meant violating the acceptable use policy with your ISP.
> But the "breaking the law" phrase is often tossed out in the popular
> press.  Personally I think it's pure FUD, but in the context of the
> article it's hard to tell if it was taken out of context.
>
> http://constructiveinterference.net/archives/186
>
> --Rob
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> wsfii-discuss mailing list
> wsfii-discuss at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/wsfii-discuss
>