[PConvert]

So I bought an Airport EX for the sole purpose of throwing me ethernet in my dorm room into it so I don't have a big blue ugly cable attached to my laptop constantly and I can surf/work in bed etc.


However, the computer techs say they're not allowed here, and won't work - but I know there's some way around it.


Any help?

[Camera God]

My college allows them, but you have to register the WAN MAC address with my college. Perhaps that is all that you need to do. The base station should not really look much different than your computer when hooked up to the ethernet from the standpoint of the college.

[larkost]

Many large networks do not allow WAPs out of three grounds:

Most of the WAPs can have the DHCP server turned on on the ethernet port. Having a rouge DHCP server on a campus network can wreck havoc... unless you are on a port-switched network and have good techs they are very hard to find, and will kill the network. It is far simpler to ban them outright. I worked for a campus IT center and was grilled by a gaggle of angry network tecs who had figured out I was involved in a case of a rough DHCP server, turned out my only involvement was that my machine received a IP address from said server... but they were annoyed enough not to differentiate.

The liability laws for internet service providers are a huge minefield, I am always amazed that universities keep providing network access at all, and don't farm it out to someone else purely on these grounds. If students are then further sharing this connection with the world around them, the university could be held liable for anything done through your access point. While you could theoretically secure it, it is tough to separate those who have the know-how, and those who don't... once again it is far simpler to ban them outright.

Many campuses provide wireless access points for the entire campus (or at least large zones) having competing access points on the same frequencies can screw this up. Since it would be a logistical nightmare to try and coordinate frequencies, it is far simpler to ban them outright.

[Sod Off Sadr]

Originally posted by larkost:

The liability laws for internet service providers are a huge minefield


the university could be held liable for anything done through your access point.

dude where do you get that from? Legal precedent says that ISPs are not liable for what happens on their networks.

You see the big record labels litigating against Earthlink, comcast, et al.? No. Why? They'd LOSE. These liability cases have been fought before, and the courts have sided with ISPs.

Just see the most recent ruling in favor of shaman/kazaa/etc.: They are not liable for copyright infringement occuring because of their software or on their networks.

arrrhhhhhhhhh!

[Sod Off Sadr]

Originally posted by PConvert:
So I bought an Airport EX for the sole purpose of throwing me ethernet in my dorm room into it so I don't have a big blue ugly cable attached to my laptop constantly and I can surf/work in bed etc.


However, the computer techs say they're not allowed here, and won't work - but I know there's some way around it.


Any help?

if your ethernet hookup works with your mac without any special settings, then it will work with your airport express. plug it in and go if that's what you want to do.

[larkost]

Sod Off Sadr: I worked for a large university and was in the meeting with the high priced layers who were telling us about the very dangerous waters we were venturing into by providing wireless networks across the whole campus. A lot of work wen into securing that network so that every use of it could be tracked back to a campus account. Who am I going to trust on this legal information... them, or you? Care to share were you passed the bar exam?

[Scotttheking]

If your school says you can't put in a router / WAP / whatever in your dorm room, then don't. If you really want one, go rent an apartment, and you'll be able to.
If the school says no routers, then turn off the routing part. If you can't, get a WAP.
If they say no wireless, then don't.
It's not worth it. Besides, dorm rooms are so small that having an ethernet cable go where you want isn't hard.

--Scott

[Sod Off Sadr]

Originally posted by larkost:
Sod Off Sadr: I worked for a large university and was in the meeting with the high priced layers who were telling us about the very dangerous waters we were venturing into by providing wireless networks across the whole campus. A lot of work wen into securing that network so that every use of it could be tracked back to a campus account. Who am I going to trust on this legal information... them, or you? Care to share were you passed the bar exam?

Just pick up a freakin' paper and read, or put your academic skills to good use and do research on this stuff. No uni or ISP has been found liable for the copyright infringement or network misuse of their users. Napster got busted because they were storing that stuff on their servers. But the overarching precedent is that a network provider--someone simply trasmitting voice or data--is not liable for the abuses of its users. It doesn't get any more plain than that.

However, what the lawyers freak over is being sued. Having to pay for high-priced, drawn-out litigation is what buckles most institutions. It's really RIAA bully tactics. That's how the ACLU wins most of its anti-religious cases. It bullies others with its deep legal pockets and is willing to litigate everyone into poverty and compliance in the pursuit of its agenda. The RIAA is no different.

[larkost]

Sod Off Sadr: I think you just made my point for me.

[Sod Off Sadr]

Originally posted by larkost:
Sod Off Sadr: I think you just made my point for me.

No. Your point was that a uni is liable for copyright infringement by its users. My point is that they are not, but that they appease the RIAA in order to avoid expensive litigation.

However, nothing stops the RIAA from filing individual John Doe lawsuits against infringers on a uni network, just like they sue regular net users on ISP networks. No difference.

So I made my point and exposed your unfounded point.

[kampl]

Originally posted by Sod Off Sadr:
No. Your point was that a uni is liable for copyright infringement by its users. My point is that they are not, but that they appease the RIAA in order to avoid expensive litigation.

However, nothing stops the RIAA from filing individual John Doe lawsuits against infringers on a uni network, just like they sue regular net users on ISP networks. No difference.

So I made my point and exposed your unfounded point.

In my experience the Uni networks are at least aware and have to take action in this case. There are several Uni networks that have "SafeHaven" status, and they continue to get cease and desist notifications from RIAA, MPAA. Mediaforce is the usual agent that does the notifying and follow up, for the last couple years anyway.

The usual case is that the Uni does its due diligence in locating and removing the copyrighted material from the offending machine, HR or whomever gets involved to stem this activity in the future, a notification that actions were taken by the network administrators is sent, and life goes on. No litigation from there.

If there are others out there that have experienced otherwise I'd love to hear about it.

I guess you have a point that liability may be limited, but it is not like they can just say "pshaw" and let it go on.

[larkost]

Originally posted by Sod Off Sadr:
No. Your point was that a uni is liable for copyright infringement by its users. My point is that they are not, but that they appease the RIAA in order to avoid expensive litigation.

<snip>

So I made my point and exposed your unfounded point.

Um... actually I never mentioned "file sharing"... and that was not my point at all... You (Sod Off Sadr) are the one that brought that up. If I were a still working for a university network my vote on the policy would be to simply shut off those ports altogether, then put some language into the agreement saying that internal sharing will be grounds for network privilege revocation. Not what I was talking about.

The issues that the have the layers working overtime are the liability issues. Since the university does not sell you your internet access (a complex legal point.. I stopped really listening to that conversation after about 5 minutes) there is no legal agreement that releases the network provider from liability for the actions taken on the network. So if someone committed a crime using a campus network, the university could be help civilly liable for allowing that act, and could be sued.

The somewhat silly, but clarifying example that was used: If a gun shop were to allow customers to "try-out" guns before buying them, and a customer were to shoot someone while "trying out" a gun, then the shop-owner could be held liable for that act, and sued by the relatives. If the same shop instead made everyone become a "member" and sign a waiver of liability, then the shop would not be liable. Silly, but legally true.

You made my point because it is not necessarily the case that such a trial would ever come before a jury... because large universities have so much money flowing through them, they are huge targets for lawsuits. They are afraid of having to settle lawsuit, after lawsuit, after lawsuit. I don't like it, but that is our civil justice system.

Now that I have spelled it out for you... would you stop pretending to be a lawyer, Sod Off Sadr?