[FedCom] Interpretations of HR3482]

[Dave Emery]

On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 03:23:59PM -0800, Harry Marnell wrote:
> Points well taken, Dave.  MY point was simply that it doesn't add to the list of
> types of communications we're prohibited from monitoring, which HAS been stated
> in a number of posts here and there on the net.

	Yes, but not by me....

	But in fact, I will state that I DO fear that if the DOJ starts
prosecuting hobbyists - which the CSEA/Homeland Security Act allows  for
the first time with the possibility of serious penalties - that there is
a nasty chance that some of the circuit court decisions that result
from these cases might have the net effect of significantly changing the
location of the boundary lines between forbidden and allowed signals
just because the current ECPA language is vague and confusing and has
mostly never been tested in court. And a court test is almost certain to
firm up and redefine somewhat what the law means.

	And whilst such court interpretations  COULD favor greater
listening rights, they are more likely to further restrict them, perhaps
pretty drastically.   And if such a court decision does come down,
previously seemingly legal scanning could suddenly become seriously
criminal because of what was done by the Homeland Security Act in making
ALL violations serious felonies.


> 
> And no, I think it's terrible public policy, born of paranoia that seems to be
> running rampant in many quarters.  I also happen to be a lifelong (so far)
> railfan, and take a look at what this
> "anything-goes-in-the-name-of-homeland-security" frenzy has done to that
> harmless hobby, at
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A56984-2002Nov14.html
> 
> Guilty until proven innocent.  The Constitution is being turned upside-down
> before our eyes.
> 
	I am afraid I agree with you...  and I fear for my country...

-- 
	Dave Emery N1PRE,  die@die.com  DIE Consulting, Weston, Mass. 
PGP fingerprint = 2047/4D7B08D1 DE 6E E1 CC 1F 1D 96 E2  5D 27 BD B0 24 88 C3 18