In Reply to: Re: content of scanner activity not to be discussed posted by Dick H on December 01, 2000 at 19:54:16:
The statute (47 USCS Section 605) also states:
No person not being entitled thereto shall receive or assist in receiving any interstate or foreign communication by radio and use such communication (or any information therein contained) for his own benefit or for the benefit of another not entitled thereto. No person having received any intercepted radio communication or having become acquainted with the contents, substance, purport, effect, or meaning of such communication (or any part thereof) knowing that such communication was intercepted, shall divulge or publish the existence, contents, substance, purport, effect, or meaning of such communication (or any part thereof) or use such communication (or any information therein contained) for his own benefit or for the benefit of another not entitled thereto.
Since I did not receive any benifit from it or benefit another, I wouldn't wait up for the feds to bust in.
Additionally, Edwards v. State Farm Ins. Co., 833 F.2d 535 (5th Circuit, 1987), states that a communication is protected if there is a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Also in STATE v. BICHSEL, 101 Ore. App. 257, (yes, I know this case would only be persuasive in Wash. State or the 9th Circuit) the court stated "We hold that the trial court erred in its conclusion that the broadcast was not "for the use of the general public." [*261] The police had no property or privacy interest in it. It is undisputed that it was transmitted on a frequency that was accessible to the public, who could listen without subscription, payment or other hindrance. The scanner that defendant used to receive the message was for sale at K-Mart and Radio Shack stores. Although the police intended that the broadcast be for police use, the message was not coded or scrambled, and the police knew that the public could listen to it. The public could understand the content of the message without the use of special equipment, even [***6] though police officers were identified by number rather than by name. The broadcast was "for the use of the general public" within the meaning of the exception in ORS 165.540(4). Defendant committed no crime when she tape recorded the police radio broadcast. "
: TRUST ME, I AM IN SECOND YEAR LAW,
: When you get to 3rd year law you might study the Communications Act of 1934, which states that you can listen to anything that is on the air (now modified by cell phone bans) but you can not repeat it to a 3rd party - the 1st and 2nd being the 2 parties who are communicating.
: It further states you can not use what you hear for personal gain.