im broadcasting my scanner online

[blay1]

Hi my name is Billy im broadcasting my scanner online between 9 am and midnight to listen to it load up windows media player click on file and then click on open url and enter http://4.3.134.17:1776 it covers san bernardino county system 1 thanks

 

[N_Jay]

Hi my name is Billy im broadcasting my scanner online between 9 am and midnight to listen to it load up windows media player click on file and then click on open url and enter http://4.3.134.17:1776 it covers san bernardino county system 1 thanks

Not very legal.

You are not permitted to disclose the contents of intercepted communications.

The exceptions are Broadcasts (this is the legal definition of Broadcast, as in TV, AM, FM, SW Broadcasts, not synonomous with all transmitting), and Emergency messages.

Sorry dude to burst your bubble.

 

[blay]

hey a lot of pepole brodcast there scanners online

 

[N_Jay]

hey a lot of pepole brodcast there scanners online

Hey, a lot of people download copyrighted music.

Hey, a lot of people speed.

Hey, a lot fo people smoke pot.

Guess we have a new definition of legal? :twisted:

 

[blay]

what is so wrong with brodcasting scanners online

 

[mr_hankey]

sorry to burst YOUR bubble, N_Jay, but you're going to have to convince all these other people that's it's illegal too:

http://shoutcast.com/directory/?s=scanner&x=0&y=0&numresult=25

 

[N_Jay]

Not trying to convince anyone, just stating the facts as I understand them.

Does anyone here want to express an opinion (or facts) that agree or refute my position?

And "lot of people do it" does not count!

 

[DOPPLERBOB]

I can't see how it could be illegal if there are some PD's in the country that actually rebroadcast their own audio!
They are breaking their own laws??
http://www.lvmpd.com/video_audio/scanner.htm

Check out that link for one of many.

Check out this link for many more:
http://www.police-scanner.info/livescan.htm

Enjoy,
Bob
Milford, Ct.

 

[N_Jay]

I can't see how it could be illegal if there are some PD's in the country that actually rebroadcast their own audio!
They are breaking their own laws??
http://www.lvmpd.com/video_audio/scanner.htm

Check out that link for one of many.

Check out this link for many more:
http://www.police-scanner.info/livescan.htm

Enjoy,
Bob
Milford, Ct.

They can do anything they want with their audio.

The issues you are intercepting communicatoins which you are not a party to.

From my understanding it is illegal to profit from or disclose the contents of communications if you are not party to the message.

 

[N_Jay]

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/2511.html

I think it is general laws like this that apply.

 

[kikito]

I think it'll be just a matter of time before they start "cracking down" on people broadcasting Public Safety communications over the Internet. Either that or it'll give the agencies being broadcasted a reason to go fully encrypted all the time. Look at how long it took the RIAA to start suing people for sharing music BUT they're doing it....

People might argue that anyone can buy a scanner and listen but at least when someone gets a scanner they will have to know something to make it work properly and they might not have all the frequencies or information needed to take advantage of it. It wouldn't be as easy as clicking on a link from anywhere in the world and listen....

My personal opinion: We shouldn't attract more attention than needed towards the hobby and ourselves, especially with all the "terrorism paranoia" running around....

 

[ECPD279]

It is against federal law to disclose any information you hear from any non-broadcast source WITHOUT PERMISSION FROM THE ORIGINATOR. I believe we covered this in another thread. Technically you may not say to your wife "Hey, there's a big crash on Northbound 680, I heard it on my scanner!" but we all do it anyway. You may rebroadcast if you have permission from the source e.g. rebroadcasting NASA communications over an amateur repeater. Yes we all divulge things we've heard, no this does not make it any more legal. However, it really all depends on whether you live by the letter of the law or the spirit of the law.

Letter of the law says thou shalt not!

Spirit of the law is to prevent sensitive or private information being relayed to "unwholesome" individuals. Do you know if what you just heard is sensitive?

All in all, I'd say unless the FCC starts shutting down all these scanner rebroadcasts we probably have nothing to worry about. However if you hear that the feds are cracking down, I'd get your station off the air (or wire in this case) post-haste!

 

[crayon]

I believe we covered this in another thread.

Indeed, we did. Here.

Does anyone here want to express an opinion (or facts) that agree or refute my position?

Yes. I will refute your position.

Section 705 of the Communications Act generally does not prohibit the publication on the Internet of fire department and police department radio broadcasts. The interception of these radio communications is legal under the criminal wiretap statute, 18 U.S.C. 2510 et seq., to the extent the communications are readily accessible to the general public, which police and fire department radio communications generally are.

Therefore, the rebroadcast of police and fire department radio communications that are obtained legally does not constitute a violation of section 705 of the Communications Act.

The aforementioned is a quote directly from the FCC and can be found here under the heading of "U.S. Federal Laws".

 

[N_Jay]

Interesting. Thanks for the update.

So, I am not allowed to disclose the contents but I am allowed to publish them.

I will believe it, as it would certainly not be the first time the FCC provided inconsistant rulings.

I guess if you want to disclose what you here you need to go into the other room and listen off your Internet connection.

 

[crayon]

Interesting. Thanks for the update.

roger.

So, I am not allowed to disclose the contents but I am allowed to publish them.

Clearly, this is a topic that can very easily splinter into numerous fragments of converstion. Remember, the context in which this discussion resides relates only to public communictions from law enforcement or fire departments.

After making a blanket prohibition of intercepting all electronic (i.e., radio) transmissions, the [ECPA of 1986] statute lists the exceptions. The first exception is that it is legal to listen to all radio transmissions which are "readily accessible to the general public."

This term used to be defined in the statute to mean radio signals which are: (1) not encrypted, scrambled, carried on a subcarrier or other signal subsidiary to a radio transmission (2) not transmitted over a common carrier communications system (such as the phone company) (3) not special transmissions such as point-to-point private relay transmissions for the broadcast services, not meant for reception by the general public. ...

At this point the only legal listening outside the broadcast bands is:

(a) a communication relating to ships, aircraft, vehicles or persons in distress;

(b) a broadcast by any governmental, law enforcement, civil defense, private land mobile or public safety communications system, including police and fire;

(c) transmissions on the amateur bands, citizens band or general mobile radio services as well as any marine or aeronautical communications system;

(d) satellite transmissions of cable programming as long as the transmission is not encrypted, there is no monetary gain by the viewer, and there is no marketing system available (meaning no one is selling the rights to view the programming via satellite).

(e) a radio transmission which is causing interference with any lawfully operating station (including ham radio operators), or is causing interference with any consumer electronic equipment, to the extent necessary to identify the source of the interference.

See http://www.grove-ent.com/LLawbook.html from which this quote was taken.

It goes on futher to state:

It should be noted that section 705 of the Communications Act of 1934 (codified as 47 U.S.C. §605) has not been repealed by the ECPA.

It is still illegal, as it has been since 1912, to divulge the existence or contents of any transmission except for general broadcast stations, amateur radio and CB transmissions, and transmissions relating to ships, aircraft, vehicles or persons in distress.

In a 1987 case (Edwards v. State Farm Insurance Co., 833 F.2d 535 (5th Cir. 1987)) the court concluded that in order to prove an offense under this statute, the speaker must have held a subjective expectation of privacy that was justifiable under the circumstances.

This principle was also set forth in United States v. Basey, 816 F.2d 980 (5th Cir. 1987), where the Court said: "Apart from specific statutory protections, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in broadcasts over the public airwaves which are exposed to everyone in the area having a radio tuned to the same nonexclusive channel."

Therefore it is (a) legal to listen to police and fire broadcasts, and (b) legally divugle (or broadcast on the internet, or retell either verbally or electronically) said transmissions.

Please review this website since there are some relevent comments about profit motives.

All of the divergent personal interpretations stems from a misunderstanding of what supersedes what.

 

[crayon]

++ note ++

Kicking this up to top since I did some heavy editing of my previous post.

 

[N_Jay]

After making a blanket prohibition of intercepting all electronic (i.e., radio) transmissions, the [ECPA of 1986] statute lists the exceptions. The first exception is that it is legal to listen to all radio transmissions which are "readily accessible to the general public."

This term used to be defined in the statute to mean radio signals which are: (1) not encrypted, scrambled, carried on a subcarrier or other signal subsidiary to a radio transmission (2) not transmitted over a common carrier communications system (such as the phone company) (3) not special transmissions such as point-to-point private relay transmissions for the broadcast services, not meant for reception by the general public. ...

At this point the only legal listening outside the broadcast bands is:

(a) a communication relating to ships, aircraft, vehicles or persons in distress;

(b) a broadcast by any governmental, law enforcement, civil defense, private land mobile or public safety communications system, including police and fire;

(c) transmissions on the amateur bands, citizens band or general mobile radio services as well as any marine or aeronautical communications system;

(d) satellite transmissions of cable programming as long as the transmission is not encrypted, there is no monetary gain by the viewer, and there is no marketing system available (meaning no one is selling the rights to view the programming via satellite).

(e) a radio transmission which is causing interference with any lawfully operating station (including ham radio operators), or is causing interference with any consumer electronic equipment, to the extent necessary to identify the source of the interference.

Interesting agian..
I notice that sometimes they use the term "Transmission" and other times "Broadcast".

Ain't the law grand.

 

[Vinman]

If thats true, why do some of the News media organizations have a live scanner feed going? For example:

http://www.azcentral.com/news/scanner.html

http://www.phoenix360.com/scanner/

Wouldn't you think a big organization like an ABC franchise would have lawyers telling them it is illegal?

 

[silaxo1]

You can listen to the police, and you can pass on the information, except that it must not be "with intent to improperly obstruct, impede, or interfere with a duly authorized criminal investigation......",