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