Slashdot Mirror

FYI, only 12 out of 50 states forbid recording a conversation you have without the other party knowing. From URL http://www.callcorder.com/phone-recording-law-america.htm :

The U.S. federal law allows recording of phone calls and other electronic communications with the consent of at least one party to the call. A majority of the states and territories have adopted wiretapping statutes based on the federal law, although most have also extended the law to cover in-person conversations. 38 states and the D.C. permit recording telephone conversations to which they are a party without informing the other parties that they are doing so.

12 states require, under most circumstances, the consent of all parties to a conversation. Those jurisdictions are California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Washington.

In the vast majority of the US, what he has done is perfectly acceptable, at least with regards to letting the other party know or not know about the conversation being recorded. Just because your personal ethical framework doesn't agree, this doesn't make Nesson a douchebag.

A lot of people think RIAA is "slimy" for all of the collateral damage they are causing to society while trying to preserve their dying business model. Personally, I'm undecided whether their actions are actually unethical --- but I'm certain that they are dangerous and detrimental to society.

I am not sure if this will help, but I have mentioned it to people in the past as to if it is 'legal' for them to record something.

http://www.callcorder.com/phone-recording-law-america.htm

This varies from state to state. The following is also helpful for noting particular oddities by state:

http://www.citmedialaw.org/legal-guide/state-law-recording
http://www.rcfp.org/taping/states.html

If anyone knows if this covers video recording as well and if it doesn't has a link, please let me know. I like keeping a list of such things.

Make sure you're in a one-party state before you go recording all calls.

http://www.callcorder.com/phone-recording-law-america.htm

I was going to just post the states and whether they are 2 party or 1 party (see middle of link above) however Slashdot kicks me out with a Lameness filter. Derp.

Are you just making things up as you type them out? Whether or not a two-party conversation could be recorded with knowledge only of one of the parties has always been a state issue. Here is a list of states that allow one party, or require two party notification. (Disclaimer: I'm not associated with this site, just found it on Google, and make no claims to its' accuracy.)

I have only three words...

Encrypt, encrypt, encrypt!

They have no right to listen, and no reason to be suspiscious. I happen to live in a two-party state where recording of phone calls has to be known to all parties on the call. Since they're not notifying me or the other party on the calls I make, their use of the data they may glean, is inadmissible and against the law.

Just encrypt everything, locking down your conversations, speak in code, use encrypted SMS messages and so on.

Don't let them in, because they have no right or reason to be there. Period.

They want to make it hard for us to enjoy our freedoms, then I'm more than happy to make them earn their right to violate them by making it ridiculously hard to decrypt/brute/crack any encryption that I may use.

That's not the case. In most states, you only need the consent of one party to tape record the call. Hence in most states, you can tape your calls without notifying others.

from another post here
http://www.callcorder.com/phone-recording-law-amer ica.htm go down to arizona

You cannot record anyone without permission unless you have a court order.

No, some states prohibit that, and some don't. Federal law does not. For the states that prohibit it, it only applies to calls where both ends are in the state, since across state lines, federal law applies to telecom.

But Washington (where Haselton lives) is not one of those states.

That would depend on the state law. Most states only require one person to be aware that the call is being recorded. Only 12 require that all parties be aware of the recording.

http://www.callcorder.com/phone-recording-law-amer ica.htm
http://www.rcfp.org/taping/states.html

Also I recall someone taping a Customer Service call to AOL (iirc) and noting that the automated system said "Your call may be monitored or recorded, etc, etc" the obvious inference being recorded by AOL, but not explicitly stated that way, and could easily be taken as granting permission to record the call. Maybe they had a disclaimer on their recorded message too.

I take it YANAL.

In the majority of states on the US, only one party needs to consent to taping. Reference

You overstate the universality of recording audio. In fact, far more states require only one party to consent to being recorded.

http://www.callcorder.com/phone-recording-law-amer ica.htm

Similarly, it's illegal to record a telephone conversation without telling all parties on the line that it's being recorded. I think that's federal law.

Actually, only a handful of states require notification of all involved parties. Most only require one-party notification.

http://www.callcorder.com/phone-recording-law-amer ica.htm#The%20US%20Federal%20Law

Actually, the federal law only requires single user notification. Say I am in VA and call someone in OH. Since both states and the federal government only require single consent, I can record the conversation without worry. Sources: One and Two.

In other words, if you are a party to the conversation, feel free to record. You can't record your two neighbors having a private conversation but you can record the conversation you have with your neighbor(s).

"Canadian federal law requires one-party consent for telephone call recording. Please refer to provincial laws for more information.

It is sometimes legal to record somebody's conversation without his consent in case of a crime. In Canada, illegally obtained evidence is never automatically excluded. Rather, if someone's rights have been violated, the evidence shall only be excluded "where it would bring the administration of justice into disrepute" (Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms). So each illegally obtained wiretap would be considered individually."

source: http://www.callcorder.com/phone-recording-law-cana da.htm

Actually that statement is incorrect. In most states of the US, recording a conversation is legal as long as ONE party on the call knows that it is being recorded. There are certain states that require that both parties are notified. I found the following link that explains it much better than I. http://www.callcorder.com/phone-recording-law-amer ica.htm