Slashdot Mirror


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."

2 of 215 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Most states already have an "either party" stat by SoupGuru · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.

    --
    What doesn't kill you only delays the inevitable
  2. Re:Recording police? by corbettw · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.

    --
    God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.