SC>  JN>  You're correct Gary. All Motorola said was that it was illegal 
SC>  JN>  to divulge or use any information obtained. They mentioned 
SC>  JN> an  old, old section of the original 1930's communitions act 
SC>  JN> and  failed to quote the ECPA. 
SC> 
SC> Is that because they expect the ECPA to eventually be overturned?  Or 
SC> just 
SC> that it's boilerplate copy written before ECPA?  I suspect the 
SC> latter.
    I'd expect it's because Motorola doesn't want to be sued by some 
cell-phone buyer naive enough to think that ECPA is actually much either 
observed or enforced.
    Motorola wants to be crystal-clear to all buyers that if you say it on 
their cell-phone, someone is likely listening.
--- Simplex BBS (v1.07.00Beta [DOS])
---------------