See page 20, line 10 and read onwards, the Judge clearly understands the difference.
And further to that the Judge specifically calls out the underlying basis behind your objection and saying it's misplaced. (page 21, line 8)
On another note, I had no idea but this would seem that the Judge is saying that if you are caught running wireshark with your network card on promiscuous setting in a public wifi you are wire tapping. It's fine to connect to the network, just not listen to other people's packets.
Which seemed totally outrageous when I first realized it, then totally made sense the more I thought about it. After all, phone cables are publicly accessible, it's fine to use them for your phone calls, moment you hook up a physical wiretap to the publicly accessible telephone lines, boom, you're wiretapping.
See page 20, line 10 and read onwards, the Judge clearly understands the difference.
And further to that the Judge specifically calls out the underlying basis behind your objection and saying it's misplaced. (page 21, line 8)
On another note, I had no idea but this would seem that the Judge is saying that if you are caught running wireshark with your network card on promiscuous setting in a public wifi you are wire tapping. It's fine to connect to the network, just not listen to other people's packets.
Which seemed totally outrageous when I first realized it, then totally made sense the more I thought about it. After all, phone cables are publicly accessible, it's fine to use them for your phone calls, moment you hook up a physical wiretap to the publicly accessible telephone lines, boom, you're wiretapping.