Wireless Internet sharing law need clarification to make digital Britain work

Daithí Mac Síthigh, a lecturer in IT and internet law with Norwich Law School at UEA, says current legislation is not the best way to regulate wifi sharing – where a network is used by more than one client. He says the law needs clarifying so it does not discourage people from using wireless and hold back provision of community wifi schemes. Mac Síthigh is also concerned about the implications for the UK Government's commitment to broadband access from every home by 2012, as set out in its Digital Britain report in June. A range of technologies, including wireless, he points out, will be required to deliver this basic broadband coverage. In his study, entitled 'Law in the Last Mile: Sharing Internet Access Through WiFi', Mac Síthigh suggests that there are advantages to sharing, but that current legislation unnecessarily restricts the development of "what would be of benefit to society". He also suggests that it is necessary to change relevant legislation to avoid giving disproportionate protection to Internet service providers (ISPs). "Digital inclusion is a government policy and rightly so. People may not have broadband in every road, particularly in rural or isolated areas, and costs of a good connection remain high, so sharing Internet access is recognised as a great way of filling in the gaps," insists Mac Síthigh. "Shared Internet access has potential social benefits, but it's harder to encourage people to take part if the legalities are unclear. Furthermore, local communities trying to use wireless access to extend connectivity have faced objections from established industries that this is anti-competitive or a breach of contract. If the legal environment was more favourable to sharing it would play an important part in achieving the Digital Britain aim of inclusion and social goals of increased access." Mac Síthigh believes that many may already technically be breaking the law. He points out that convictions and arrests have been made under section 125 of the Communications Act 2003, which states that 'a person who (a) dishonestly obtains an electronic communications service and (b) does so with intent to avoid payment of a charge applicable to the provision of that service, is guilty of an offence'. The Computer Misuse Act 1990 also creates various offences relating to the use of computers, he states.