Path: utzoo!utgpu!ugw.utcs.utoronto.ca!CUVMA!SWL-L
Date:	Fri, 12 Jan 90 19:06:29 EST
Reply-To: Eric Roskos <apple!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!IDA.ORG!roskos@BBN.CO>
Sender: Short Wave Listener's List <SWL-L%CUVMA.bitnet@ugw.utcs.utoronto.ca>
Comments:     Warning -- original Sender: tag was
From:	Eric Roskos <apple!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!IDA.ORG!roskos@BBN.CO>
Subject:      Re: Cordless Telephones & Court Ruling
X-To:         swl-l@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To:	UofToronto LAN redistribution <SWL-L%UTORGPU.bitnet@ugw.utcs.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <90Jan12.211011est.58542@ugw.utcs.utoronto.ca>
Newsgroups: bitnet.swl-l
Distribution: ut
Approved: devnull@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu

Does anyone have the rationale behind this ruling available?

It is interesting how people (particularly lawmakers) think about these
topics.  One thing that comes to mind is that cordless telephones provide
their own means of monitoring (i.e., two cordless phones that work on
the same frequency could be used to listen to each other without
modification, I think) whereas cellular telephones inherently have built
in mechanisms to prevent that.  I wonder if this might be involved in
the rationale?

--
Eric Roskos (roskos@CS.IDA.ORG or Roskos@DOCKMASTER.NCSC.MIL)

        "What is the point of this story?  What information pertains?
         The thought that life could be better