Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles; site uokvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!mgnetp!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!uokvax!lmaher
From: lmaher@uokvax.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.tv
Subject: Re: satellites and legalities - (nf)
Message-ID: <6000013@uokvax.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 15-Aug-84 01:46:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: uokvax.6000013
Posted: Wed Aug 15 01:46:00 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 18-Aug-84 01:48:56 EDT
References: <379@vortex.UUCP>
Lines: 22
Nf-ID: #R:vortex:-37900:uokvax:6000013:000:767
Nf-From: uokvax!lmaher    Aug 15 00:46:00 1984

#R:vortex:-37900:uokvax:6000013:000:767
uokvax!lmaher    Aug 15 00:46:00 1984

/***** uokvax:net.tv / vortex!lauren /  6:40 am  Aug 11, 1984 */
Actually, the "footprint" of a broadcast isn't the issue--the intended
audience IS.  For example, listening in on telephone conversations
off of a communications satellite (even though the satellite has a 
very broad footprint) is considered, from a legal standpoint, to be
wiretapping.

--Lauren--
/* ---------- */

On the other hand, listening to someone's conversation over a
cordless phone is NOT wiretapping.  There was a legal case where
a citizen overheard a drug deal being made over a neighbor's
cordless phone, and informed the police.  The judge ruled that
the user of a cordless phone has no expectation of privacy,
since he is broadcasting the conversation.

	Carl
	..!ctvax!uokvax!lmaher