[12642] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: Wiretap Act Does Not Cover Message 'in Storage' For Short Period
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John S. Denker)
Thu Mar 6 12:23:37 2003
X-Original-To: cryptography@wasabisystems.com
X-Original-To: cryptography@wasabisystems.com
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 10:44:00 -0500
From: "John S. Denker" <jsd@monmouth.com>
To: Will Rodger <wrodger@pobox.com>
Cc: cryptography@wasabisystems.com
In-Reply-To: <20030305193054.18B187B4D@berkshire.research.att.com>
Will Rodger wrote:
> John says:
>
> > Wireless is a horse of a different color. IANAL but
> > the last time I looked, there was no federal law
> > against intercepting most wireless signals, but you
> > were (generally) not allowed to disclose the contents
> > to anyone else.
>
>
> No longer, if it ever was. It's a crime, as evidenced by the wireless
> scandal a few years back when some Democrat partisan intercepted
> communications of Republican leadership in Florida, then talked. The
> simple act of interception was illegal.
Next time, before disagreeing with someone:
a) Please read what he actually wrote, and
b) Don't quote snippets out of context.
Three sentences later, at the end of the paragraph that
began as quoted above, I explicitly pointed out that
> cellphone transmissions are a more-protected special case.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@wasabisystems.com
