Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ccivax.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!ihnp4!zehntel!hplabs!hao!seismo!rochester!ritcv!ccivax!abh From: abh@ccivax.UUCP (Andrew X. Hudson) Newsgroups: net.audio Subject: Re: decoding subscription TV - legality Message-ID: <190@ccivax.UUCP> Date: Wed, 8-Aug-84 12:33:14 EDT Article-I.D.: ccivax.190 Posted: Wed Aug 8 12:33:14 1984 Date-Received: Thu, 16-Aug-84 02:03:22 EDT References: <21100003@ucbcad.UUCP> Organization: CCI Telephony Systems Group, Roch, NY Lines: 13 I believe that the point of local jurisdictions having say of subscription services is correct. However you may have problems with the subscription business if you are caught. For instance it is a common practice to among cable tv companies to charge you through the nose if you are caught with a channel splitter. Its a matter of losing the service, not going to court. I believe many phone companies are the same way. Andrew Hudson -- "Freedom of choice is what you got Freedom from choice is what you want" - DEVO ...[rlgvax | decvax | ucbvax!allegra]!rochester!ritcv!ccivax!abh