Husband’s divorce attorney violated the federal Wiretapping Statute (18 USC 2511) when he filed transcripts of conversations between wife and her child which husband had surreptitiously taped on a recorder hidden in the child’s backpack. Husband couldn’t vicariously consent on the child’s behalf to recording the conversations since the child was not in husband’s custody at the time of the recording. The attorney’s use of the recordings as evidence in the divorce proceedings was not privileged under the Noerr-Pennington doctrine. That doctrine protects only petitioning activity, such as filing a complaint or answer. But once a party is in court, the party must obey rules applicable to all in court proceedings, including rules governing use of evidence. Jones was free to file and argue the custody motion—i.e., to petition—but he was not free to support that motion with illegal evidence. The district court erred in limiting plaintiff’s damages to $10,000. Under the federal statute, the plaintiff is entitled to the greatest of actual damages, $10,000, or $100 per day during the wiretapping. Here, plaintiff claimed that the wiretapping went on for 700+ days, so statutory damages might amount to more than $700,000, and she could also recover punitive damages, attorney fees and costs.