179,854Messages
9,130Senders
30Years
342mboxes

← back to listing · view thread

From:
JT
To:
Date:
Wed, 28 Sep 1994 13:09:11 -0400 (EDT)
Subject:
Re: Re: FSOL/e-mail addresses/Scanner
Msg-Id:
<199409281709.NAA05985@beauty.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>
In-Reply-To:
<e898b9b0@cclink.fhcrc.org>
Mbox:
idm.9409.gz
quoted 3 lines NOSY) citizen and given to the police. The court ruled that cordless> >NOSY) citizen and given to the police. The court ruled that cordless > >phone conversations were _not_ protected by the right to privacy (I seem > >to recall that there was a big uproar about this). Besides, the UK has
quoted 3 lines I believe that cordless and cellular phones are not covered under normal> I believe that cordless and cellular phones are not covered under normal > phone-taping laws because they are transmitted over the airwaves. > Anyone with a scanner can pick up the conversations.
By law in the US, monitoring cordless phones (those in the home in the 40-something MHz band) is LEGAL. Monitoring the cellular band (800+MHz band) is ILLEGAL. Just listening to it can get you busted. Many radio manufacturers try to avoid trouble by preventing reception of the 800 MHz band without mods, but then they go and publish the mods, which usually involve cutting a diode or pathway. Some manufacturers don't bother with this, and even still, there is legislature trying to prevent the reception even if the radio has to be modified... which, uh, kinda eliminates some TVs that can be fine tuned in the UHF range. ;) JT