HR 2369 -- Wireless Privacy Enhancement Act of 1997


HR 2369
105th CONGRESS
1st Session
To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to strengthen and clarify 
prohibitions on electronic eavesdropping, and for other purposes
                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
                               July 31, 1997
Mr. Tauzin (for himself, Mr. Markey, Mr. Oxley, Mr. Gillmor, Ms. Eshoo
and Ms. McCarthy of Missouri) introduced the following bill which was 
referred to the Committee on Commerce
                                  A BILL
To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to strengthen and clarify 
prohibitions on electronic eavesdropping, and for other purposes.
     Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled.
SECTION 1, SHORT TITLE.
     This Act may be cited as the "Wireless Privacy Enhancement Act
     of 1997".
SECTION 2,  COMMERCE IN ELECTRONIC EAVESDROPPING DEVICES.
     (A) PROHIBITION ON MODIFICATION. -- Section 302 (b) of the Communicat-
ions act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 302 (b) is amended by inserting before the
period at the end thereof the following ",or to modify any such device,
equipment or system in any manner that causes such device, equipment, or
system to fail to comply with such regulations".
     (B) PROHIBITION ON COMMERCE IN SCANNING RECEIVERS. --  Section 302 (d)
of such Act (47 U.S.C. 302(d) is amended to read as follows:
     (d) The Commission shall prescribe regulations denying equipment
authorization (under part 15 of title 47. Code of Federal Regulations or
any other part of that title) for any scanning receiver that is capable
of ---
     (1) receiving transmissions in the frequencies allocated to any 
commercial mobile service (as defined in section 332(d).     
     (2) readily being altered to receive transmissions in such frequencies.
     (3) being equipped with decoders that convert digital mobile service
transmissions to analog voice audio or
     (4) being equipped with devices that otherwise decode encrypted radio
transmissions for the purpose of unauthorized interception.
     (C) IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS -- Within 90 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Federal Communications Commission shall prescribe
amendments to its regulations for the purposes of implementing the 
amendments made by this section.  In prescribing such amendments, and in
response to subsequent changes in technology or behavior, the Commmission
shall review and revise its definition of the term "capable of readily
being altered" as necessary to prevent commerce in devices that may be
used unlawfully to intercept or divulge radio communication.
SECTION 3. UNAUTHORIZED INTERCEPTION OR PUBLICATION OF COMMUNICATIONS.
     (A) AMENDMENTS -- Section 705 of the Communications Act of 1934
(47 U.S.C. 605 is amended --
     (1) in the heading of such section, by inserting "INTERCEPTION OR"
after " UNAUTHORIZED"
     (2) in the second sentence of subsection (a), by striking "and
divulge" and inserting "or divulge", 
     (3) in subsection (e) (1) --
         (A) by striking fined not more than $2000.00 or" and
         (B) by inserting "or fined under title 18, United States Code."
             after "6 months,"; and 
     (4) in subsection (e) (3), by striking "any violation" and inserting 
"any receipt, interception, divulgence, publication or utilization of 
any communications in violation", and
     (5) in subsection (e) (4), by striking "any other activity prohibited
by subsection (a)" and inserting "any receipt, interception, divulgence
publication, or utilization of any communication in violation of
subsection (a)".
     (B) RESPONSIBILITY FOR ENFORCEMENT. -- Notwithstanding any other
investigative or enforcement activities of any other Federal agency,
the Federal Communications Commission shall investigate alleged violations
of section 705 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 605) and 
may proceed to initiate action under section 503 of such Act (47 U.S.C. 503) 
to impose forfeiture penalties with respect to such violation upon 
conclusion of the Commission's investigation.
Back to Notes on Bill
Who Would Have Been Hurt
Scanners are not the culprit
Where Scanners Have Made A Difference
Sample Letter
Return Back