Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 6/7/83; site hao.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!mgnetp!ihnp4!zehntel!hplabs!hao!ward From: ward@hao.UUCP (Mike Ward) Newsgroups: net.tv,net.legal Subject: Re: satellites and legalities Message-ID: <1109@hao.UUCP> Date: Mon, 13-Aug-84 19:01:42 EDT Article-I.D.: hao.1109 Posted: Mon Aug 13 19:01:42 1984 Date-Received: Wed, 15-Aug-84 06:34:59 EDT References: <379@vortex.UUCP> Organization: High Altitude Obs./NCAR, Boulder CO Lines: 16 [] I seem to remember a discussion awhile back about someone who overheard a dope deal made over a cordless phone and reported it to the police. The consensus seemed to be that because the conversation was being broadcast, it was not wiretapping to listen in. How is this different from listening in to phone conversations "broadcast" from a satellite? No question of intended reciever was allowed in the dope deal case. Sounds to me like there's a different standard for the guys the government likes and the guys the government doesn't like. -- Michael Ward, NCAR/SCD UUCP: {hplabs,nbires,brl-bmd,seismo,menlo70,stcvax}!hao!sa!ward ARPA: hplabs!hao!sa!ward@Berkeley BELL: 303-497-1252 USPS: POB 3000, Boulder, CO 80307