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