This is fascinating that some manufacturers may have gone down this Darwinian path in "improving" their products.
Is there any such law against this or any efforts in introducing such laws, either in Norway or elsewhere?
Is there any such law against this or any efforts in introducing such laws, either in Norway or elsewhere?
No. https://boingboing.net/2014/10/03/fcc-fines-marriott-for-jam...
>No person shall willfully or maliciously interfere with or cause interference to any radio communications of any station licensed or authorized by or under this chapter or operated by the United States Government.
So according to you, denying everyone usage is worse than denying everyone else usage to improve your usage?
>If we expand the definition of jamming to the protocol level like exemplified here, the law gains broad authority to interpret any online interaction that makes your experience worse as "jamming." The law should really should stick to radio frequency enforcement, and stay out of protocol-level concerns - it's just too big a can of worms.
This is a fundamental misunderstanding of how the legal system works. It's not an algorithm. Intent matters. Going back to the originally quoted text, it says "willfully or maliciously", so maxing out your WLAN to transfer files 24/7 is probably not going to get a knock on the door by the FCC. Intentionally jamming your neighbor's wifi (deauth packets or otherwise) is.
If you’re objecting to the phrasing in the boingboing article (which called it “jamming”), ok, but the law seems clear to me and the interpretation thereof I think was correct.
I posted what turned out to be a misunderstanding (or incomplete if you are more generous) understanding of spectrum rules. My comment was correctly downvoted to 0, but more importantly I got a response that simply explained where I was (utterly) wrong. No flames, no further conjecture, just references. There's a little bit of following discussion.
This is the way it's supposed to work!!