Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ucla-cs.ARPA
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!prls!amdimage!amdcad!amd!pesnta!hplabs!sdcrdcf!trwrb!trwrba!cepu!ucla-cs!reiher
From: reiher@ucla-cs.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.auto,net.legal
Subject: Re: A comment on Radar and Telephones
Message-ID: <6589@ucla-cs.ARPA>
Date: Fri, 16-Aug-85 03:33:38 EDT
Article-I.D.: ucla-cs.6589
Posted: Fri Aug 16 03:33:38 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 23-Aug-85 07:24:28 EDT
References: <2493@pegasus.UUCP> <754@dataio.UUCP> <713@cvl.UUCP>
Reply-To: reiher@ucla-cs.UUCP (Peter Reiher)
Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department
Lines: 16
Xref: linus net.auto:6709 net.legal:1768

In article <713@cvl.UUCP> eli@cvl.UUCP (Eli Liang) writes:
>The thing thats been interesting for me is that one could say that using
>a telephone is a privilege and not a right (you don't own the telephone lines
>that your call goes over) and then use that as justification for wiretapping.
>Sure, they don't do that now, but whose stopping them if they start using
>excuses like this?

As I understand it (those dread words which always seem to precede an error),
it is a privilege and not a right, and what keeps them from wiretapping at
will is a federal law which says they can't.  Repeal the law and they can.
I suppose that the Supreme Court might well decide that telephone conversations
are covered by the implied right to privacy, but, then again, perhaps not.
-- 
        			Peter Reiher
				reiher@LOCUS.UCLA.EDU
        			{...ihnp4,ucbvax,sdcrdcf}!ucla-cs!reiher