A little while ago, I happened to stop at a fast food restaurant, bought some food, and attempted to look for an available wifi signal. I found one, connected, and was given a portal page that identified the router in question as sponsored by a nearby business, which I was not patronizing at the time. The restaurant that I was in didn’t appear to have its own wireless.
The “other” wifi, from the nearby business, presented a clickwrap contract to me regarding the terms and conditions of service. I spent some time scrutinizing the contract, and found that there did not appear to be any mention of any requirement that use is contingent on being a current customer. It had a lot of mumbo jumbo regarding the fact that usage is not guaranteed to be private, could be monitored, and that the service provider is not responsible for any losses incurred in use of the network.
-
Would it have been ethical to use this connection? I am conflicted on this. On the one hand, my ordinary analysis of the situation is that the wifi is put out for the benefit of the current customers rather than as a general community outreach. On the other hand, one could argue that it IS a community outreach benefit and ADVERTISING, that puts the business’ name in front of potential FUTURE customers (like me), telling me that the company cares just a little, and that maybe the next time I am looking for something that that business provides, I might want to pick them because there is wifi there.
-
Would it have been LEGAL? Feel free to use the jurisdiction of your knowledge. My initial thought was that it would be technically legal, because there was an EXPLICIT user agreement that was presented to me that did not mention anything about needing to be a customer, but then I thought of common sense intent and whether or not a jury would feel that just because the company forgot to put a clause in the contract, that allows me to use as much Internet as I want without giving them a penny.
I suppose I could just call and ask.