I don't think the story says so explicitly, but he was also probably using their network, power, etc. to do his work. I'm guessing they must have a guest wifi network or the like where a non-corporate computer connecting wouldn't raise any flags.
No, but if you steal his wifi, he might have a claim because you utilized his infrastructure (without consent) to make it. I'm not a lawyer, but I believe this has at least been raised in some situations where people used either company computers or other equipment to set up a new business.
Why is heat any different? If the temperature was too low, my fingers would have frozen off while typing.
(I think the answer in this case is: I didn't take any action to receive the heat. Now the question is: why can't I legally decrypt satellite TV that's being blasted through my brain 24/7?)
I believe that it has been ruled that technically you can decrypt the satellite TV legally. Provided that you do it 100% independently and do not attempt to sell plans, kits, etc. or otherwise profit from your ability to decrypt the signal.
Purchasing equipment that significantly enhances your ability to decrypt the signal (eg: a pre-programmed or altered smart card) is where you run into issues.
In the US, decrypting satellite TV without authorization is illegal under 47 USC 605(a)(6): "No person not being entitled thereto shall receive or assist in receiving any interstate or foreign communication by radio and use such communication (or any information therein contained) for his own benefit or for the benefit of another not entitled thereto."
Additionally, unauthorized decryption of a copyrighted program or movie is a violation of the DMCA, 17 USC 1201(a)(1): "No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title."
Worst case, he has to reimburse them for the cost imposed, plus some sort of rent, plus some kind of punitive damages. No way does AOL get any sort of ownership out of this, though.
The worst case is that they argue that the company wouldn't exist without his misappropriation of AOLs resources and should be awarded X% of the company as compensation, where X is equal to the percentage of the company that equals the amount of money that he cost AOL in food, supplies, network access, etc... at the time of the misappropriation. They could argue that they were de-facto investors because of the material support they "offered".
Or they could keep him tied up in court trying to argue his way out of it.
The only reason why he is going to make it out of this okay is the bad press that AOL would get for going after him.
Does it really work that way? I thought you could be held liable for damages (including punitive), not hypothetical what-if scenarios. If I steal your laptop and use it to sell an app, then later I'm caught, I'll go to jail for theft, and you'll get your laptop back, but you won't get any ownership of the app I developed.
