For years, legal ethics attorneys and many other experts have warned about the dangers of using free Wi-Fi, and Starbucks has become the poster child for the dangers of logging into unsecured and unprotected computer networks. With its recent Opinion in Commonwealth v. Dunkins, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has issued clear advice and a clear warning that users, including criminals, have no privacy rights when they check the box and log into a free unsecure network. For criminals, this decision means that law enforcement does not need a search warrant to view the information being transmitted. For civil litigants, this decision means that users of free Wi-Fi are fair game for anyone trying to see what they are saying, doing or sending. For everyone else, this decision also means that users of free Wi-Fi are fair game for anyone trying to see what they are saying, doing or sending. But for lawyers, it means that confidential or sensitive information about clients and others - information that lawyers are required to keep confidential under the Rules of Professional Conduct - is not confidential when using the free Wi-Fi at Starbucks and so many other places. Listen to techno-ethics attorney and technologist Daniel J. Siegel as he outlines the dangers of using free Wi-Fi and why this Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision is a game changer. This podcast is sponsored by Integrated Technology Services, LLC and the Law Offices of Daniel J. Siegel, LLC.