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