Cyrus Afzali wrote:

This is not true in the United States, as I understand it.
From NF2G's very nice site: "Section 705 (47 USCA 605) states that it is
unlawful to disclose the content of radio transmissions overheard unless

No, you need to get a clue and stop being an ass. You are free to
disclose the content of ANY, and I mean ANY, conversation that's sent
out over the public airwaves. A person can't be charged with a crime
for passing along the content of something that's not illegal to
monitor in the first place.

That's EXACTLY what the law I quoted above says, very explicitly:
you MAY monitor these transmissions but you may NOT disclose the
contents to any other person. If you can't understand the very
plain language above, perhaps your babysitter can help.

Really, for the love of God, I hope you're not studying law if you are
at Duke. If you are, PLEASE get a refund and try a new vocation.

I'm a proctologist, and I look in the scanner newsgroup from
time to time because there are so many gaping *ssh*les here.



_______________________________________________
Ken Kuzenski AC4RD ken . kuzenski at duke .edu
_______________________________________________
All disclaimers apply, see? www.duke.edu/~kuzen001