4 ms·

Trespassing is a good analogy. Neither all laws or violations of laws are equal. On one hand, there are the vandals, or outright criminals, who are using and

by chavesn 12y ago

Trespassing is a good analogy. Neither all laws or violations of laws are equal. On one hand, there are the vandals, or outright criminals, who are using and abusing my property for their gain to my detriment. On the other hand, there's a passerby who knows about the criminals in the area, knows no one else is looking for them, and trespasses my property because the trail led him onto it. Now that guy willingly alerts me to the criminals, offers an explanation of what he did on my property and how he found the criminals -- what should my response be? I know that technically he broke the law, and there are those who want to see anyone and everyone pay for their deeds, but in this situation, wouldn't a reasonable person possibly consider tracking down the criminals first before crying "trespassing!"

jMyles 12y ago
It doesn't sound like this person trespassed at all, but merely traversed your land during his investigation. He didn't do any damage or remove anything, so what was the trespass?
- AnkhMorporkian 12y ago
  I wouldn't be happy at all if someone went into my cellar without my permission and told me that my gas line was weakening. Despite good intentions, trespass is trespass.
  - atmosx 12y ago
    What if his house was next to yours and he smelled a gas leak but wasn't sure, so his investigation led him to your cellar?
    - mpyne 12y ago
      If he can smell it from outside my cellar, then why isn't he able to knock on my door? Or call the cops if I'm not home. Even for actual extremis (such as a fire) I'd generally expect people to call the fire department instead of breaking into my house to put a blanket over a kitchen fire. With that said I'm sympathetic to this guy's intent. If I were Yahoo or the FBI and he can prove that innocuous access is all he was doing, let's just say I wouldn't go out of my way to throw the book at him. Because (going back to IRL analogies again), the authorities writ large have the authority to do an exigent search of my home if there's probable cause of a disaster of some sort going on, but local and Federal LE don't exactly have the same right to go around pwning the entire Internet to look for sites that have already been rooted, so in a sense leaving this issue to the authorities is simply leaving it to no one except the criminals, which is also unsatisfactory. If the right answer to widespread problems like these is supposed to be law enforcement "patrolling the Internet" in some fashion, then we'd need to have way different legal authorities to allow for that. Until then I'm not sure that "only the criminals can search for burning buildings on the Internet" is really the most pragmatic answer. In any event we obviously can't rely on each and every single important web site's system administration teams. If even Yahoo can be caught, who can you trust?
      - cruisername 12y ago
        call the cops if I'm not home yeah right, they'll fix your KDE 2 install on freebsd in a jiffy as well Until then I'm not sure that "only the criminals can search for burning buildings on the Internet" is really the most pragmatic answer. It's not a pragmatic answer, it's a matter of fact. NSCIA are busy collecting phone calls and developing backdoors. I'd be careful calling anyone criminal.
- tantalor 12y ago
  Would you allow a police officer to do the same?
- bradleyjg 12y ago
  Trespass to land doesn't require damage, all it requires is the willful, unauthorized, entry onto land in another's exclusive possession. Vandalism requires that there by some property damage.
  - barrkel 12y ago
    This isn't true. You're overestimating the strength of property rights to land. You should follow the link provided elsewhere in this branch of the discussion - http://www.shouselaw.com/trespass.html http://www.shouselaw.com/trespass.html
    - jMyles 12y ago
      It's amazing how many people think that traversing and trespassing are the same thing. Sadly, in many states, they are the same under the law. I wish there were stronger free-to-roam laws. I don't think anybody has the right to tell another person they can't traverse land so long as they don't enter any structures, do any damage, take anything, disturb any wildlife, etc.
cmdrfred 12y ago
Exactly, intent is very important in these types of things.

by chavesn 12y ago

jMyles 12y ago

It doesn't sound like this person trespassed at all, but merely traversed your land during his investigation. He didn't do any damage or remove anything, so what was the trespass?

AnkhMorporkian 12y ago
I wouldn't be happy at all if someone went into my cellar without my permission and told me that my gas line was weakening. Despite good intentions, trespass is trespass.
- atmosx 12y ago
  What if his house was next to yours and he smelled a gas leak but wasn't sure, so his investigation led him to your cellar?
  - mpyne 12y ago
    If he can smell it from outside my cellar, then why isn't he able to knock on my door? Or call the cops if I'm not home. Even for actual extremis (such as a fire) I'd generally expect people to call the fire department instead of breaking into my house to put a blanket over a kitchen fire. With that said I'm sympathetic to this guy's intent. If I were Yahoo or the FBI and he can prove that innocuous access is all he was doing, let's just say I wouldn't go out of my way to throw the book at him. Because (going back to IRL analogies again), the authorities writ large have the authority to do an exigent search of my home if there's probable cause of a disaster of some sort going on, but local and Federal LE don't exactly have the same right to go around pwning the entire Internet to look for sites that have already been rooted, so in a sense leaving this issue to the authorities is simply leaving it to no one except the criminals, which is also unsatisfactory. If the right answer to widespread problems like these is supposed to be law enforcement "patrolling the Internet" in some fashion, then we'd need to have way different legal authorities to allow for that. Until then I'm not sure that "only the criminals can search for burning buildings on the Internet" is really the most pragmatic answer. In any event we obviously can't rely on each and every single important web site's system administration teams. If even Yahoo can be caught, who can you trust?
    - cruisername 12y ago
      call the cops if I'm not home yeah right, they'll fix your KDE 2 install on freebsd in a jiffy as well Until then I'm not sure that "only the criminals can search for burning buildings on the Internet" is really the most pragmatic answer. It's not a pragmatic answer, it's a matter of fact. NSCIA are busy collecting phone calls and developing backdoors. I'd be careful calling anyone criminal.
tantalor 12y ago
Would you allow a police officer to do the same?
bradleyjg 12y ago
Trespass to land doesn't require damage, all it requires is the willful, unauthorized, entry onto land in another's exclusive possession. Vandalism requires that there by some property damage.
- barrkel 12y ago
  This isn't true. You're overestimating the strength of property rights to land. You should follow the link provided elsewhere in this branch of the discussion - http://www.shouselaw.com/trespass.html http://www.shouselaw.com/trespass.html
  - jMyles 12y ago
    It's amazing how many people think that traversing and trespassing are the same thing. Sadly, in many states, they are the same under the law. I wish there were stronger free-to-roam laws. I don't think anybody has the right to tell another person they can't traverse land so long as they don't enter any structures, do any damage, take anything, disturb any wildlife, etc.

cmdrfred 12y ago

Exactly, intent is very important in these types of things.