Quote:
Originally Posted by FASherman
I have been an IT tech and manager for over 20 years and have had to design systems to comply with the law.
(3)(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection,
a person or entity providing an electronic communication service
to the public shall not intentionally divulge the contents of any
communication other than one to such person or entity, or an
agent thereof) while in transmission on that service to any
person or entity other than an addressee or intended recipient of
such communication or an agent of such addressee or intended
recipient.
(b) A person or entity providing electronic communication
service to the public may divulge the contents of any such
communication -
(i) as otherwise authorized in section 2511(2)(a)
or 2517 of this title;
(ii) with the lawful consent of the originator or
any addressee or intended recipient of such communication;
(iii) to a person employed or authorized, or whose
facilities are used, to forward such communication to its
destination; or
(iv) which were inadvertently obtained by the
service provider and which appear to pertain to the commission of
a crime, if such divulgence is made to a law enforcement agency.
|
I sorta feel bad cause I am the one that originally requested this for 2.2.x but it would seem you show yourself that it IS legal in fact because the section reads
Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection
(iii) to a person employed or authorized, or whose
facilities are used, to forward such communication to its
destination;
It would sure seem it is MY facilities being used to forward the message which by this text would mean it is LEGAL. Just my 2 cents and thanks for the update of the hack.