NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/rec/aviation/17583

Internet Message Format | 1992-12-29 | 1.6 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!bcm!lib!oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu!jmaynard
From: [e-mail] (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: One of my "heard on the air" postings in IFR unattributed
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 29 Dec 1992 16:58:31 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston
Lines: 18
Nntp-Posting-Host: oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] () writes:
>There's an interesting point here.  Some radio channels, particularly
>(I think) the ham bands, carry with them an FCC regulation prohibiting
>people from divulging what they hear over those channels.  Thus, though
>it is legal to own and use a ham receiver, without any license, my
>understanding is that it violates FCC regulations to tell anyone else
>what you hear on the ham bands.

Actually, the privacy portion is contained in section 603 (I think) of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended by the Electronic Communications
Privacy Act of 1986. The ham bands, the broadcast services, and any distress
communications are specifically exempted from the privacy provisions. For the
rest of the services, including aviation, the law states that you can listen,
but you cannot divulge what you've heard for personal gain.
--
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
[e-mail]      | adequately be explained by stupidity.
 "Brought to you by the letters O, S, and by the number 2." -- Mike Levis