Scanners, Internet and the Law: An objective discussion with case law.

[gmclam]

I dunno Crayon. I see it ending badly if the scanner community pissed off the LAFD. One of a few scenarios would likely play out:

1. LAFD encrypts their system. Voila, no more streaming OR scanning.
2. LA City council passes a local law banning all internet streaming of city communications, complete with hefty fines and jail time.
3. More active enforcement of the local ordinances banning mobile scanner use in LA (yes, there is a law in LA County prohibiting this, although it's rarely enforced).
4. LAPD encrypts and adopts a similar "No Streaming" stance.
5. More anti-scanner legislation run through congress under the guise of "enhancing homeland security".

If you live in the service area of LAFD, it would seem to me they are an agency that you do not want to be on bad terms with. You never know when you are going to need EMS or the Fire Department. Who's to say they would just "take their time" responding to a call at a location known to stream their communications.

 

[Thayne]

I was asking the question many times and different ways what is the main or real reason(s) someone or a group of someones' set up streaming; I never did get a good honest answer.

I am of the opinion those that want to listen to the airwaves should do it themselves because while streaming is not illegal it still seems to piss off a lot of Govt. types and hence will hasten the end of a lot of easy monitoring for everybody.

 

[crcarter]

I am of the opinion those that want to listen to the airwaves should do it themselves because while streaming is not illegal it still seems to piss off a lot of Govt. types and hence will hasten the end of a lot of easy monitoring for everybody.

I for one am thankful for persons who set up a streaming feed. I live too far away from a major city to pick them up on my scanner, but close enough that I care what goes on.

You know what they say about opinions..........

 

[jscott02]

while streaming is not illegal it still seems to piss off a lot of Govt. types and hence will hasten the end of a lot of easy monitoring for everybody.

Quite the opposite here. A couple of the local FD unions have links to my feed posted on their sites. I've also received in person "thanks" from some Chiefs for having it up so they can listen from home. Maybe your area is different.....I guess YMMV applies here

 

[JoeyC]

I am of the opinion those that want to listen to the airwaves should do it themselves because while streaming is not illegal it still seems to piss off a lot of Govt. types and hence will hasten the end of a lot of easy monitoring for everybody.

Agree! Alls one has to do is read the rationale agencies have given for going encrypted to see that internet streaming of police comms is just not very smart, regardless of its legality. Fire comms on the other hand I don't see an issue with.

 

[Thayne]

I for one am thankful for persons who set up a streaming feed. I live too far away from a major city to pick them up on my scanner, but close enough that I care what goes on.

You know what they say about opinions..........

You are right about opinions, I take no offense for that & I also understand why you are thankful for the easy opportunity to listen.
BUT CAN ANYONE GIVE SOME UNDERSTANDABLE ANSWER AS TO WHAT THE PEOPLE THAT GO TO THE TROUBLE TO SET UP STREAMING GET OUT OF IT?

Warm Fuzzies
Admiration
Just plain altruism
Just because they can
Floats their Boat
Get Jollies

Surely there must be a REAL reason

 

[EdmontonFireRadio]

It may be a combination of all of the reasons above. For me it gives me a good feeling that we are able to show just how dedicated the men and women are that serve this community. Unless someone has had the opportunity to serve on a fire department or listen to a scanner they have no idea what it's like to be on the front lines protecting life and property.

We host our cities fire and EMS audio online and have gotten a lot of great feedback from not only the community but from members of the fire department itself. During tours they let people know where they can listen in and seem to take pride that the feed is available. We have also heard from recruits that are getting ready to start their job on the department. They say listening to the feed while they are getting ready for their next day of training helps to keep them motivated and give them focus.

Our listeners are from all across Canada, The US, Australia, England and Germany just to name a few. We average over 200 unique listeners per day and over the past month have had 6,320 different users stop by and have a listen. We have even been featured in the Edmonton Sun newspaper.

It's stories like we had received from someone that told us about him listening to the feed one day to hear an address where his wife happened to be visiting. The person EMS was being dispatched for had the same description as his wife so he went out to make sure she was ok. When he arrived on scene the EMS worker mentioned that he must have been listening to our feed to be able to get on scene so quickly. Everything turned out ok but it was great to hear from him about being able to get to his wife's side when she needed him the most.

Also a few months ago there was an explosion at a local plastics plant. Family members were able to tune in and listen directly as crews battled the fire and hear if everyone at the plant was ok. There were no deaths at this accident but it took a long time for anyone to get with them through official channels. However since they were able to tune in and hear for themselves what was happening it helped to relieve their stress as reports were relayed from the scene.

I guess we all have our reasons and I guess we all get something out of sharing our equipment with people that don't have the ability to listen directly themselves. I am just glad that there are people willing to do so and hope they continue for a long time to come.

 

[K4IHS]

Out of the blue I received the following email from the FCC today...

You are receiving this email in response to your inquiry to the FCC.

Dear Mr. Stallsworth,

Thank you for contacting the Federal Communications Commission.

You may wish to reference U.S. Code Title 18, Part I, Chapter 119, Section 2511, regarding Interception and disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications at: US CODE: Title 18,2511. Interception and disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications prohibited.

There are statutes - Federal and State - that govern the interception of radio communications and may make an activity unlawful and may subject the violator to severe criminal penalties.

Of those statutes that may govern interception of radio communications, the FCC only has the authority to interpret Section 705 of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. Section 605, "Unauthorized Publication of Communications." Section 705 of the Communications Act generally does not prohibit the mere interception of radio communications, although mere interception of radio communications may violate other Federal or State statutes.

In other words, if you happen to over hear your neighbor's cordless telephone, you do not violate the Communications Act. Similarly, if you listen to radio transmissions on your scanner, such as emergency service reports, you are not in violation of Section 705. However, a violation of Section 705 would occur if you divulge or publish what you hear or use it for your own or someone else's benefit.

An example of using an intercepted call for a beneficial use in violation of Section 705 would be someone listening to accident reports on a police channel and then sending his or her tow truck to the reported accident scene in order to obtain business.

Criminal prosecution for a violation of the Communications Act is within the discretion of the Department of Justice.

Section 302(d) of the Communications Act, prohibits the FCC from authorizing scanning equipment that is capable of receiving transmissions in the frequencies allocated to domestic cellular services, that is capable of readily being altered by the user to intercept cellular communications, or that may be equipped with decoders that convert digital transmissions to analog voice audio.

In addition, U. S. Code Title 18, Part I, Chapter 119 , Section 2520 notes recovery of civil damages. In General, except as provided in section 2511 (2)(a)(ii), any person whose wire, oral, or electronic communication is intercepted, disclosed, or intentionally used in violation of this chapter may in a civil action recover from the person or entity, other than the United States, which engaged in that violation such relief as may be appropriate.

Enhanced services, such as electronic mail or internet access services, are not regulated under Title II of the Communications Act of 1934; thus are not within the regulatory jurisdiction of the FCC. The FCC does not regulate the Internet, Internet access, Internet content, or Internet Service Providers (ISPs).

Thank you for your inquiry.

Brenda Althoff
Consumer Advocate and Mediation Specialist
Federal Communications Commission
Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau

Representative Number : TSR22

 

[crayon]

Out of the blue I received the following email from the FCC today...

I read the contents of the email that you posted from the FCC and I cannot see anything new. Looks like a quick cut and paste standard form letter, but at least you were thanked for your inquiry.

 

[K4IHS]

The interesting thing to note here is I made the inquiry waaaaaaay back in October of 2007! I have not contacted them since then! Just wondering why they would send a second... slightly different response 3 years later without me contacting them???

The response back then was...

Hello,

FCC rules do not prohibit redistributing over the Internet those
communications licensed under FCC rules Part 90, such as the communications
of local government, law enforcement, civil defense, private land mobile, or
public safety communications, including police, EMS, fire and the like.

Licensees under FCC rules Part 90 concerned about the intercept and
divulgence of their communications may encrypt or ?scramble? these
communications, except for station identification. Part 90.735(d) requires
station identification to be transmitted by unencrypted voice. Station ID
may also be by digital transmission of the station call sign, including by
Morse code. A licensee that identifies its station in this manner must
provide the Commission, on request, information (such as digital codes and
algorithms) sufficient to decipher the data transmission to ascertain the
call sign transmitted.

Rules are located in Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations; Part 90 is
available online at
FCC: Wireless Telecommunications Bureau

Hope this information proves helpful.

Thank You

Rep Number : TSR09

 

[crayon]

The interesting thing to note here is I made the inquiry waaaaaaay back in October of 2007! I have not contacted them since then! Just wondering why they would send a second... slightly different response 3 years later without me contacting them???

lol. That rocks.

Perhaps when they were resurrecting the "lost" Bush administration emails, they unearthed more than they thought they would.

The dwarves delved too greedily and too deep. You know what they awoke in the darkness of Khazad-dum...

 

[Tweekerbob]

That is odd indeed.

 

[K4IHS]

I replied to the FCC email and was answered within a few hours. This was the response...

You are receiving this email in response to your inquiry to the FCC.

Dear Mr. Stallsworth,

The service which RadioReference.com provides appears to be a paid service to access data from their database to connect to a scanner.

It appears as though RadioReference.com provides premium services to members through a subscription service of features available including direct data downloads, personalization, printable PDF formats, and live audio feed archives.

Access to the RadioReference.com Web Service allows numerous programming applications to access the database directly providing an easy to use process for programming scanners and communications equipment with data directly from the RadioReference Database.

A premium subscription is required before a user can download data using these applications to connect your scanner to their database.

Thank you for your inquiry.

TSR22

Representative Number : TSR22


I have sent them another email asking for a simple answer to the question (yes or no) is it legal or not to live stream. Lets see what happens next!?

Lindsay... are you catching this?

 

[blantonl]

I saw this post.

 

[mtindor]

Warm Fuzzies
Admiration
Just plain altruism
Just because they can
Floats their Boat
Get Jollies

Warm fuzzies I guess. I don't think anybody admires me for doing it... and could care less if they did.

I am a techy kind of guy. I have the scanners (i never bought one specifically to dedicate to streaming nor would I). I benefit personally because I almost exclusively listen to the agencies that I stream via my own feed. I'm in a basement home office and the feed scanners are upstairs connected to a headless machine (which doubles as my main work machine). I RDP into my work machine from my laptop to run most applications. I tune into a feed if I want to hear those agencies. I have two other scanners downstairs that I use for searching out new frequencies. My family like the ability to listen to the feeds regardless of where they are at (they are all well connected, at their homes and mobile).

If the feed were of no benefit to me, I probably would have taken it down after a few months... at least in the beginning. Now that I'm more involved with RR, I'm glad my feed is available for RR to stream -- and I'm thankful for the great platform Lindsay has provided which lets me, my family and friends connect to it from wherever to listen.

If my feed is of interest to others, I'm glad they are enjoying it.

Mike