Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old March 16th 08, 07:04 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.moderated
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Dec 2007
Posts: 69
Default Secrecy Clause of the Communications Act of 1934

Hello Phil, I was wondering if the Secrecy Clause was still a part of
the Communications Act of 1934, or if it had been rescinded or replaced
by some other Language in some later Act? Does it still apply to any FCC
Operator License Holder?

--
Bruce in alaska
add path after fast to reply

  #2   Report Post  
Old March 17th 08, 02:50 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.moderated
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Oct 2006
Posts: 527
Default Secrecy Clause of the Communications Act of 1934


"Bruce in alaska" wrote in message
...
Hello Phil, I was wondering if the Secrecy Clause was
still a part of
the Communications Act of 1934, or if it had been
rescinded or replaced
by some other Language in some later Act? Does it still
apply to any FCC
Operator License Holder?

--
Bruce in alaska
add path after fast to reply

I am not an attorney or a specialist so I can't answer
this directly. However, you might be able to find what you
want at:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18..._I_20_119.html

The entire current communications act is available as a PDF
from the FCC at:
www.fcc.gov/Reports/1934new.pdf

I think what you are asking about is the restriction on
discolosing any private communication one might intercept.
This never applied to amateur communication because it is
not, per se, private. It would apply to any commercial
communication you might overhear other than that clearly
intended for public consumption such as broadcasting.
That is, if you can hear telephone conversations from a
wireless phone or similar you may not disclose them to a
third party.
I suspect that like all law there are all sorts of
convoluted special conditions applying to this.


--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA



  #3   Report Post  
Old March 17th 08, 08:08 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.moderated
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Dec 2007
Posts: 69
Default Secrecy Clause of the Communications Act of 1934

In article ,
"Richard Knoppow" wrote:

"Bruce in alaska" wrote in message
...
Hello Phil, I was wondering if the Secrecy Clause was
still a part of
the Communications Act of 1934, or if it had been
rescinded or replaced
by some other Language in some later Act? Does it still
apply to any FCC
Operator License Holder?

--
Bruce in alaska
add path after fast to reply

I am not an attorney or a specialist so I can't answer
this directly. However, you might be able to find what you
want at:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18..._I_20_119.html

The entire current communications act is available as a PDF
from the FCC at:
www.fcc.gov/Reports/1934new.pdf

I think what you are asking about is the restriction on
discolosing any private communication one might intercept.
This never applied to amateur communication because it is
not, per se, private. It would apply to any commercial
communication you might overhear other than that clearly
intended for public consumption such as broadcasting.
That is, if you can hear telephone conversations from a
wireless phone or similar you may not disclose them to a
third party.
I suspect that like all law there are all sorts of
convoluted special conditions applying to this.


I was just wondering if that language was still part of the
Communications Act of 1934. I am familiar with all it's ramifications,
as I have been a FCC Resident Field Agent, in the past. Phil
was an FCC Lawyer in California, before he left the Commission,
and I know he will have more current knowledge, about this, than
I have.

--
Bruce in alaska
add path after fast to reply

  #4   Report Post  
Old March 18th 08, 12:36 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.moderated
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Oct 2006
Posts: 527
Default Secrecy Clause of the Communications Act of 1934


"Bruce in alaska" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Richard Knoppow" wrote:

"Bruce in alaska" wrote in message
...
Hello Phil, I was wondering if the Secrecy Clause was
still a part of
the Communications Act of 1934, or if it had been
rescinded or replaced
by some other Language in some later Act? Does it still
apply to any FCC
Operator License Holder?

--
Bruce in alaska
add path after fast to reply

I am not an attorney or a specialist so I can't
answer
this directly. However, you might be able to find what
you
want at:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18..._I_20_119.html

The entire current communications act is available as a
PDF
from the FCC at:
www.fcc.gov/Reports/1934new.pdf

I think what you are asking about is the restriction
on
discolosing any private communication one might
intercept.
This never applied to amateur communication because it is
not, per se, private. It would apply to any commercial
communication you might overhear other than that clearly
intended for public consumption such as broadcasting.
That is, if you can hear telephone conversations from
a
wireless phone or similar you may not disclose them to a
third party.
I suspect that like all law there are all sorts of
convoluted special conditions applying to this.


I was just wondering if that language was still part of
the
Communications Act of 1934. I am familiar with all it's
ramifications,
as I have been a FCC Resident Field Agent, in the past.
Phil
was an FCC Lawyer in California, before he left the
Commission,
and I know he will have more current knowledge, about
this, than
I have.

--
Bruce in alaska
add path after fast to reply



The second link, the one to the FCC, has the complete
text of the current act but does not have an index which
makes it hard to look stuff up. I think it runs some 300
pages, if you know what section to look at you can see if
the language is still there. The privacy act may also apply
here and may provide protections not in the communications
act. All this is complicated by the various homeland
security acts which allow the government to do a lot of
snooping, but that does not apply to individuals.
I am also anxious to have an opinion from a lawyer who
specializes in communications law.


--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA



  #5   Report Post  
Old March 18th 08, 08:30 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.moderated
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jan 2007
Posts: 300
Default Secrecy Clause of the Communications Act of 1934

On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 14:04:27 EDT, Bruce in alaska
wrote:

Hello Phil, I was wondering if the Secrecy Clause was still a part of
the Communications Act of 1934, or if it had been rescinded or replaced
by some other Language in some later Act? Does it still apply to any FCC
Operator License Holder?


Comes here the Kane tutorial on Communications Privacy / Secrecy......
ggg

First - some definition. "Intercept" means to merely receive the
contents of a communication, not necessarily the same meaning as to
"intercept a forward pass" in football. "Divulge" means to pass the
contents in whole or in part or in meaning to an other person not
authorized by law to receive such contents. "Personal use" means "use
for personal benefit or for the benefit of another not entitled to
thereof" although courts are loath to apply that unless there's a
monetary or similar benefit involved.

Now to the law. There are two sections of law that apply.

Section 705 of the Communications Act of 1934 as Amended [Section 605
of Title 47 of the U S Code] provides that no one receiving,
transmitting, or assisting in either may divulge the contents to
someone not authorized to receive such or make personal use of the
contents. with a whole bunch of exceptions and exemptions.

The Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), part of Chapter 119
of the US Criminal Code [ Section 2510 et seq of Title 18 of the U S
Code] provides that no one not authorized by the sender or by the law
may merely intercept certain types of communication. The violation
exists whether divulgence or personal use takes place or not. This is
the section of the law that provides the illusion of secrecy to cell
phone communications, among others. Again, there are a whole slew of
exceptions and exemptions.

Note that both sections exempt transmissions from amateur, CB, marine,
and aviation stations and communications relating to a disaster, as
well as broadcast programming (AM, FM, TV but not "satellite" TV)
intended for direct reception by the general public.

For more information. "inquire within". This is one of my
specialties.
--

73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane
ARRL Volunteer Counsel

email: k2asp [at] arrl [dot] net



  #6   Report Post  
Old March 19th 08, 12:48 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.moderated
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Oct 2006
Posts: 527
Default Secrecy Clause of the Communications Act of 1934


"Phil Kane" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 14:04:27 EDT, Bruce in alaska

wrote:

Hello Phil, I was wondering if the Secrecy Clause was
still a part of
the Communications Act of 1934, or if it had been
rescinded or replaced
by some other Language in some later Act? Does it still
apply to any FCC
Operator License Holder?


Comes here the Kane tutorial on Communications Privacy /
Secrecy......
ggg

First - some definition. "Intercept" means to merely
receive the
contents of a communication, not necessarily the same
meaning as to
"intercept a forward pass" in football. "Divulge" means
to pass the
contents in whole or in part or in meaning to an other
person not
authorized by law to receive such contents. "Personal
use" means "use
for personal benefit or for the benefit of another not
entitled to
thereof" although courts are loath to apply that unless
there's a
monetary or similar benefit involved.

Now to the law. There are two sections of law that apply.

Section 705 of the Communications Act of 1934 as Amended
[Section 605
of Title 47 of the U S Code] provides that no one
receiving,
transmitting, or assisting in either may divulge the
contents to
someone not authorized to receive such or make personal
use of the
contents. with a whole bunch of exceptions and exemptions.

The Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), part of
Chapter 119
of the US Criminal Code [ Section 2510 et seq of Title 18
of the U S
Code] provides that no one not authorized by the sender
or by the law
may merely intercept certain types of communication. The
violation
exists whether divulgence or personal use takes place or
not. This is
the section of the law that provides the illusion of
secrecy to cell
phone communications, among others. Again, there are a
whole slew of
exceptions and exemptions.

Note that both sections exempt transmissions from amateur,
CB, marine,
and aviation stations and communications relating to a
disaster, as
well as broadcast programming (AM, FM, TV but not
"satellite" TV)
intended for direct reception by the general public.

For more information. "inquire within". This is one of
my
specialties.
--

73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane
ARRL Volunteer Counsel

email: k2asp [at] arrl [dot] net

Thanks Phil, this pretty much confirms my understanding
of the law.


--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA



  #7   Report Post  
Old March 19th 08, 02:55 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.moderated
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Dec 2006
Posts: 169
Default Secrecy Clause of the Communications Act of 1934

I know you said "inquire within" but I hope that this is a short,
general-interest question with perhaps a one-word answer. (Except I
don't think I've ever seen Phil give anything approximating a one-word
answer grin).

Phil Kane wrote:

Note that both sections exempt transmissions from amateur, CB, marine,
and aviation stations and communications relating to a disaster, as
well as broadcast programming (AM, FM, TV but not "satellite" TV)
intended for direct reception by the general public.


What does "exempt" mean in this context? Does it mean that the
provisions do not apply at all if the information is transmitted by
amateur radio? I'm assuming that this is the case, since it's not
unusual for material that we relay to appear in news articles.

73, Steve KB9X

  #8   Report Post  
Old March 19th 08, 07:22 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.moderated
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Dec 2007
Posts: 69
Default Secrecy Clause of the Communications Act of 1934

In article ,
Phil Kane wrote:

On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 14:04:27 EDT, Bruce in alaska
wrote:

Hello Phil, I was wondering if the Secrecy Clause was still a part of
the Communications Act of 1934, or if it had been rescinded or replaced
by some other Language in some later Act? Does it still apply to any FCC
Operator License Holder?



snipped for brevity, but not for content.....

For more information. "inquire within". This is one of my
specialties.
--

73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane
ARRL Volunteer Counsel

email: k2asp [at] arrl [dot] net


Thanks, Phil... I was sure that you would have the information.
Now the final question, that everyone wants to know, BUT was afraid to
ask.....

Have you ever heard of ANYONE, ever being prosecuted for Violation
of Section 705 of the Communications Act of 1934.......

--
Bruce in alaska
add path after fast to reply

  #9   Report Post  
Old March 20th 08, 01:13 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.moderated
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jan 2007
Posts: 300
Default Secrecy Clause of the Communications Act of 1934

On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 09:55:33 EDT, Steve Bonine wrote:

What does "exempt" mean in this context? Does it mean that the
provisions do not apply at all if the information is transmitted by
amateur radio? I'm assuming that this is the case, since it's not
unusual for material that we relay to appear in news articles.

That is correct. (Short enough? ggg )
--

73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest

Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon

e-mail: k2asp [at] arrl [dot] net

  #10   Report Post  
Old March 20th 08, 05:12 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.moderated
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jan 2007
Posts: 300
Default Secrecy Clause of the Communications Act of 1934

On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 14:22:41 EDT, Bruce in alaska
wrote:

Have you ever heard of ANYONE, ever being prosecuted for Violation
of Section 705 of the Communications Act of 1934.......


There are a lot of cases brought under Section 705, most having to do
with theft of satellite TV programming or bootleg cable TV
descramblers which are covered by other subsections of Section 705.
One curious case involved a subscription-TV provider who enabled
Canadian providers to intercept its signals as opposed to a Canadian
program supplier competitor, the case being brought on complaint of
the Canadian government because the violator and the site of the
violation was in the US.

Most of the cellphone or cordless phone interception cases are brought
under the Wiretap Act (the ECPA) of the U S Criminal Code, Title 18.

The most famous case of off-the-air interception and divulgence
involved a conversation between certain officials of the Republican
party which was passed to "others", but long before that there were a
few cases of taxicab radio interception by competing cab companies
whose drivers "jumped" calls.
--

73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest

Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon

e-mail: k2asp [at] arrl [dot] net

Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Santa Clause like you have never seen him before Gary S. Antenna 0 February 8th 05 03:49 PM
Santa Clause like you have never seen him before m II Shortwave 1 December 29th 04 06:42 PM
Digital watermarks prove Easter Bunny son of Santa Clause Rustle Shortwave 3 May 29th 04 01:07 PM
Swiss Dig in Heels Over Banking Secrecy DeWayne Shortwave 0 April 5th 04 07:54 AM
FA: 1934 ARRL Handbook Rob S. Swap 0 March 5th 04 09:05 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:26 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017