Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: 1 party recordings

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Texas, , USA
    Posts
    80

    1 party recordings

    m.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/08/covert-iphone-audio-recording/#more-18618

    This is a federal appelate court ruling - IANAL, but looks to me that it's overruling state laws that ban one-party recordings! Comments?

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    IANAL

    The ruling seems to be very narrow and simply interprets this paragraph in federal law:

    (d) It shall not be unlawful under this chapter for a person not acting under color of law to intercept a wire, oral, or electronic communication where such person is a party to the communication or where one of the parties to the communication has given prior consent to such interception unless such communication is intercepted for the purpose of committing any criminal or tortious act in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States or of any State.
    I don't see it as affecting any State law on the subject. The ruling would simply mean that if you are a party to a conversation (or have the permission of a party), you may record a conversation as long as you are not doing so to use the recording for a criminal activity.

    The court found that the person making the recording was not doing so for a criminal purpose, therefore he did not break federal law. Whether or not he was breaking State law would be another issue.

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    As my divorce attorney in Arkansas explained to me long ago, "you may record any conversation you have with your wife or your child. The only restriction is that at least one party to the conversation be aware that it is being recorded."

    I'm not sure if other states' laws are the same or not.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    Other states make it so that all parties must consent, regardless of the location or expectation of privacy.

    Texas allows single party recordings. Which I feel is most fair.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    SEMO, , USA
    Posts
    578
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack House View Post
    Other states make it so that all parties must consent, regardless of the location or expectation of privacy.

    Texas allows single party recordings. Which I feel is most fair.
    Mo also has single party recordings. My question would be, could I be charged in a non-single party state for recording a phone call if I live in a single-party state? I would think the federal law Eye95 quoted would protect me. The scenario I thinking of would be say a business transaction over the phone. One state a single party state the other a non. There is a dispute over the transaction and litigation is filed in the non state. If the recording were to be brought into evidence could the person from the state that allows single party recordings be charged in the non-single party recording state?

    P.S.
    If that was what the story was about I apologize, the link wasn't working.
    Last edited by SavageOne; 08-22-2010 at 04:52 PM. Reason: explaining

  6. #6
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/201...udio-recording

    The proper link^


    I was actually thinking about that too because various companies like to rip you off.

  7. #7
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,613
    Quote Originally Posted by SavageOne View Post
    Mo also has single party recordings. My question would be, could I be charged in a non-single party state for recording a phone call if I live in a single-party state? I would think the federal law Eye95 quoted would protect me. The scenario I thinking of would be say a business transaction over the phone. One state a single party state the other a non. There is a dispute over the transaction and litigation is filed in the non state. If the recording were to be brought into evidence could the person from the state that allows single party recordings be charged in the non-single party recording state?

    P.S.
    If that was what the story was about I apologize, the link wasn't working.
    This would seem to be beyond the scope of OCDO and RKBA so likely not appropriate here.

    Think you need the advise of any attorney if this is a serious concern.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Wisconsin Statutes, Chapter 968 commencement of Criminal Proceedings, Interception of

    Wisconsin Statutes, Chapter 968 commencement of Criminal Proceedings, Interception of and disclosure of wire, electronic or oral communications prohibited.
    [ ... ]
    (2) It is not unlawful under ss. 968.28 to 968.37:
    [ ... ]
    (c) For a person not acting under color of law to intercept a wire, electronic or oral communication where the person is a party to the communication or where one of the parties to the communication has given prior consent to the interception unless the communication is intercepted for the purpose of committing any criminal or tortious act in violation of the constitution or laws of the United States or of any state or for the purpose of committing any other injurious act.

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    The OP posted: "This is a federal appelate court ruling - IANAL, but looks to me that it's overruling state laws that ban one-party recordings! Comments?"

    The case was one in which it was alleged that one party violated Title II of the Omnicus Crime Control Act (18 USC 2510-21). The federal court decided nothing but whether or not the defendant violated that specific federal law. Actually, the court decided that there was a technicality that precluded even alleging that the defendant violated the law.

    Thus, there is no way that the federal court's ruling invalidates any law of any state. What it does is tell folks that want to complain that 18 USC 2510-21 was violated that they need to include information about the additional alleged crime beyond merely intercepting a communication if they want to go forth in the 2nd Federal Circuit.

    No need to go hire lawyers to interpret this, but if you want a genyouwine, bought-and-paid-for legal opinion you can spend the $125 or so a lawyer will charge to tell you basically the same thing.

    As for SAvageOne's question: "could I be charged in a non-single party state for recording a phone call if I live in a single-party state? I would think the federal law Eye95 quoted would protect me. The scenario I thinking of would be say a business transaction over the phone. One state a single party state the other a non." -- the question revolves around under what law)s) the complaint was filed, and if the Circuit you find yourself in agrees with the 2nd Circuit ruling the OP referenced. Not enough info yet in your scenario for anybody to know what sort of answer to give you. That's why attorneys charge the big bucks - to compensate themselves for having to play 20 Questions in order to find out what the heck you are talking about.

    stay safe.

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    That federal law does not prohibit a behavior is no protection from State law that does.

    For example, if a federal law has a provision in its anti-nose-picking law that makes an exception for picking your nose in the privacy of your home, but your State's nose-picking statute prohibits all nose-picking, regardless of venue, and you pick your nose at home, you have committed a crime.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    SEMO, , USA
    Posts
    578
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    This would seem to be beyond the scope of OCDO and RKBA so likely not appropriate here.

    Think you need the advise of any attorney if this is a serious concern.
    You are correct. I apologize for taking thread off topic

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    492

    here's what I found

    Quote Originally Posted by rhenriksen View Post
    m.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/08/covert-iphone-audio-recording/#more-18618

    This is a federal appelate court ruling - IANAL, but looks to me that it's overruling state laws that ban one-party recordings! Comments?
    I dug around on the internet a little. Didn't have much time but this site seems to have some info that may interest you

    http://www.rcfp.org/taping/

  13. #13
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    Read the site's advice on interstate calls. Basically there still is no real concrete answer.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •