Court OKs Covert iPhone Audio Recording

Tootech writes "Using an iPhone to secretly record a conversation is not a violation of the Wiretap Act if done for legitimate purposes, a federal appeals court has ruled. 'The defendant must have the intent to use the illicit recording to commit a tort of crime beyond the act of recording itself,' the 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled. Friday's decision, which involves a civil lawsuit over a secret audio recording produced from the 99-cent Recorder app, mirrors decisions in at least three other federal appeals courts."

Comments

It's still illegal in Illinois

[mcgrew]

It doesn't break Federal law, but it may be against state law. Recording someone without their consent is a felony in Illinois, and probably other states as well.

Re:Most states already have an "either party" stat

[cgenman]

There are twelve 2-party states out there, and some of them are big ones like California and Florida. And calling a two-party state from a one-party state does mean you need to follow the laws of both states.

Check your local rules before you start recording.

Re:Most states already have an "either party" stat

[SoupGuru]

I admin a phone system in Idaho, a one party consent state. Basically, we can record anything without warning, even calls from two-party consent states.

Re:Recording police?

[corbettw]

It's never been illegal to record police in public. That hasn't stopped certain corrupt police departments and district attorneys from persecuting people who do so, of course, but they've used twisted logic, not actual law, to make their cases. Radley Balko at Reason has done a number of excellent exposes on this problem.

Re:Most states already have an "either party" stat

[Have Brain Will Rent]

He said calls from two party states not calls to two party states.