Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site hydra.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!cybvax0!frog!hydra!die From: die@hydra.UUCP (Dave Emery) Newsgroups: net.ham-radio,net.video,net.legal Subject: Private is Private Message-ID: <130@hydra.UUCP> Date: Fri, 20-Sep-85 01:04:41 EDT Article-I.D.: hydra.130 Posted: Fri Sep 20 01:04:41 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 21-Sep-85 06:01:07 EDT References: <128@hydra.UUCP> Distribution: net Organization: Charles River Data Systems, Framingham MA Lines: 65 Xref: watmath net.ham-radio:3272 net.video:1530 net.legal:2367 And apparently private is private. I had occasion to hear Sen. Gore's legislative assistant who wrote the changes to the communications act of 1934 that authorized reception of unencrypted cable feeds at a seminar at MIT. It was quite clear from the discussion that the mood in congress is to regard receiving any private radio transmission as strictly illegal, including such almost public things as network backhauls and the portions of network feeds to affiliates that aren't meant to be put on the air. The general legal situation was summed up: the satellite television viewing act created "a small and very carefully defined exception" to an otherwise absolute prohibition of reception of private communications. And further, the philosophical justification was not that cable TV feeds were a special case of private communications that could be made public because that served a public good but rather that they were somehow not really private because of their broadcast nature and wide public distribution. It seems clear that Sen. Leahy and Rep. Kastenmeier, who have filed a bill extending 2115 to cover most classes of radio transmission other than broadcast (including cordless phones), reflect a powerful sentiment in congress. It seems quite likely that receiving anything other than broadcast transmissions intended for general use may soon become major federal felonies. I have yet to take the time to read the text of their bill so I do not know whether it applies just to point to point or similar communications or whether it would apply to all non- broadcast radio communications such as police, fire, news crews, aircraft, ambulance and other such things so beloved of the millions of Americans who own scanners. It definately extends protection to data and record communications, however, and thereby closes that loophole in 2115. I suspect that if a broad bill covering interception of almost everything sent by radio becomes law this act will be another of those unfortunate American laws that are enforced only at the discretion of prosecuters and likely will be used more as a method of harrassing and pressuring selected private citizens out of favor with the authorities than as a real means of controlling private listening. I regard such laws as very unfair because they are not uniformly or fairly enforced. They encourage disrespect for the law by making an innately private act that can never be effectively policed (and which many millions of citizens practice and accept as their right) a crime, and not only that but a crime which the law usually winks at. After listening to the very economic arguments about scrambling cable feeds, I've come to the conclusion that the gentleman who claimed that it was cheaper to hire lawyers and lobbyists than buy cipher machines is right. Unfortunately, however, real security is only obtained by encryption. (I might add that the audio, data, and authorization side of the M/A Com Videocipher II seems to be impressively well secured - using DES, but the video is only lightly scrambled so watching pictures without sound will no doubt become common). I am sorry to say that everything I hear convinces me that the very strong economic interests in protection of communications the cheap way (laws) will no doubt force national policy in the direction of draconian penalties rather than universal encryption. It is too bad that this approach which is more PR than substance is being substituted for a more effective cipher based one, but such is life... David I. Emery Charles River Data Systems 617-626-1102 983 Concord St., Framingham, MA 01701. uucp: decvax!frog!die Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com