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