Nik Martin [nmartin@radiancetech.com] wrote:> Of course, big brother wants his say in the matter.
>
> http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,63884,00.html?tw=wn_2polihead
>
Apart from section 4(c), I can't find any text that would justify the
following quote from the article:
"Under Sen. John Sununu's (R-New Hampshire) proposed bill, known as
the VOIP Regulatory Freedom Act, VOIP providers would have to honor
government wiretap orders, but would not have to design special
capabilities to allow wiretaps."
Either the author of the article didn't read the text of the act properly,
or I'm missing something. :-)
Section 4(c), although the closest I could find, does not appear to have
anything to do with wiretaps.
There's nothing wrong with wiretaps in general, as long as the tapper
has a valid court order and isn't allowed to simply tap into service
provider or end user equipment at will.
--
_/ _/ _/_/_/_/ _/ _/ _/_/_/ _/ _/
_/_/_/ _/_/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/ _/ K e v i n W a l s h
_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/ kevin@cursor.biz
_/ _/ _/_/_/_/ _/ _/_/_/ _/ _/