Telecommunications Activity

Providing internet via radio without authorization from the National Telecommunications Agency (Anatel) characterizes clandestine telecommunications activity, a crime provided for in Article 183 of Law 9,472 / 1997.
The understanding, already pacified in the Superior Court of Justice, was reaffirmed by the 5th Panel of the Court in denying habeas corpus a man convicted of illegal internet radio marketing.
In habeas corpus, the defense argued that the technical reports attested that the radio equipment used was of restricted communication, which would not characterize a crime since the edition of Anatel Ordinance 680/2017.
For the defense, the conduct would be atypical because the accused was sharing internet signal with restricted communication equipment, and not developing telecommunication activity itself.
According to the rapporteur for habeas corpus, Minister Joel Ilan Paciornik, the allegation of atypical conduct is unfounded, since this was not the conclusion of the second instance after examination of the evidence.
The minister cited excerpts from the ruling of the Federal Regional Court of the 3rd Region, according to which the equipment used was capable of providing the service to several users. The scheme included the installation of a transmission tower in the house of one of the convicts - evidencing, according to the TRF-3, its commercial character.
According to Paciornik, to assess whether the equipment used would really be restricted communication, as the defense says, would require an in-depth examination of evidence, which is not possible in habeas corpus.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Systems Engineer Job Description

Security Analyst

Network Infrastructure Architect