Nat’l Satellite Sports, Inc. v. Eliadis, Inc., 253 F.3d 900, 913 (6th Cir.2001) (“In particular, the prohibition in the first sentence of § 605(a) does not involve the interception of a communication at all. It prohibits intermediaries who are authorized to receive a communication by wire or radio from divulging the contents of the transmission to any person other than the addressee intended by the sender.”); see id. ' (“An authorized intermediary of a communication (such as Time Warner) violates the first sentence of § 605(a) when it divulges that communication through an electronic channel to one “other than the addressee” intended by the sender (such as Main Events).”); Joe Hands Promotions v. D.M.B. Ventures, Inc., Nos. 93-CV-2656, 93-CV-3141, 1995 WL 328399 (E.D.La. May 31, 1995) (<HOLDING>). Although it was not resolved on the merits
holding that statement must be product of a startling event holding that a contract must entitle the plaintiff to money damages in the event of the governments breach of that contract holding that the cox bankruptcy court struck a balance too harshly against a creditor when it found that credit card debt could not be found nondischargeable under section 523a2a holding that cox cable a communications company authorized to distribute a boxing match to its residential customers by an event promoter violated the first sentence of  605a when it broadcasted the event to several commercial establishments that had falsely obtained residential service from cox cable holding that cox precludes private suits under the fdcpa that might be pursued in the bankruptcy court