On Sat, Sep 03, 2005 at 12:24:07PM +1000, Skyring wrote:
On 9/3/05, James D. Forrester james@jdforrester.org wrote:
And further, accessing a computer system without authorisation is illegal in the US, the UK, and Australia, to name but a few countries; given that you are banned from Wikipedia, any edits that you were to make would constitute such an illegal act. Several sysops, and not just Mackensen, have suggested that you may well be doing this, violating your ban order. Perhaps you might want to think about finding another place to play, Skyring?
Thanks, James. Given that Wikipedia doesn't require checking of real-life identification before allowing access to the system, I can't see your theory lasting too long in any court.
I can't see as "real-life identification" matters. Permission to access the system is withdrawn from a person, not an "identification". Once that permission is withdrawn, access is unauthorized.
A shop does not require "real-life identification" before allowing you to enter, either. But if you behave in a manner which offends the shopkeeper and she orders you to leave and never come back, and you fail to obey, you are trespassing. Identification doesn't enter into it: the shopkeeper withdrew _your_ permission to be on her property -- not your _name's_ or _ID card's_ permission.
It isn't your "identification" that's breaking the law by continuing to edit Wikipedia (if you are so doing). It's you.