The latest in the ongoing battle between the federal government and wireless carriers to control who can use and sell its wireless network.
The fight has focused on who can sell and what they can sell to customers.
It’s a war that’s gotten the government involved in court cases, and has resulted in billions of dollars in government surveillance programs that target Americans.
But it also has been a boon for wireless carriers, which have turned the fight into a business opportunity.
They’re looking to sell wireless networks to businesses that want to use them, and the companies are getting big money from the government.
In January, AT&T announced it was getting $1 billion from the Federal Communications Commission to help build its wireless infrastructure.
Sprint is paying the Department of Justice $250 million to buy up wireless networks for law enforcement agencies.
And the FCC recently approved a $2 billion deal between AT&G and Verizon to help it build a network for police departments.
The wireless carriers argue that they need to sell their networks for legal reasons.
They say the government has a broad definition of what qualifies as a wireless service and that wireless networks aren’t protected by the Communications Act.
But the government disagrees, arguing that wireless carriers aren’t required to sell networks to the government and that the law doesn’t give them permission to do so.
In the case of the federal wiretap, the government argues that the government must have a warrant before it can conduct surveillance on a wireless network and that it has the right to get a warrant from the court if they believe the data will help the government in a criminal investigation.
The FCC argues that wireless service providers are subject to state wiretap laws and that they should be subject to similar laws.
The case has been watched closely by privacy advocates who say the Supreme Court should overturn the lower court ruling that allowed the wiretap to go forward.
AT&E and Verizon have filed briefs arguing that the federal court decision doesn’t apply to wireless networks because the wireless companies aren’t subject to the state wiretaps laws.
They’ve also argued that the lower courts were wrong in their rulings.
At the heart of the matter is whether the government can use a wiretap under the Communications Decency Act, which protects speech and speech-related activities that aren’t considered harmful.
As the case goes to the Supreme Courts, the FCC and the Department are preparing a brief that’s expected to include some new information that the telecoms hope will convince the justices to overturn the case.
That’s because the case has drawn criticism from some privacy advocates and members of Congress, who have raised concerns about the surveillance and surveillance-related legal protections under the federal eavesdropping laws.
In the brief, the telecom companies argue that the Communications Commission and the Justice Department have a clear authority under the wiretapping law to investigate and collect data from wireless networks, even if the communications are not being used for criminal purposes.
They argue that this authority is limited by a two-part provision of the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA), which the FCC says allows it to use wiretaps to investigate telecommunications companies that engage in “criminal activity.”
The telecoms say the Communications Agency has the authority to use CALEA to investigate wireless networks that provide services that are not “criminal communications,” which they define as services that aren