3 ms·
Fascinating. But didn't you admit in the transcript that you broke the law in your state and California by recording the call without consent? Or was that a lie
by argimenes 8y ago
Fascinating. But didn't you admit in the transcript that you broke the law in your state and California by recording the call without consent? Or was that a lie?
- epicureanideal 8y agoNobody said he recorded it. Maybe he was typing it as they talked. Or typed enough that he could accurately recall the parts he couldn't type fast enough.
- caseysoftware 8y agoA transcription doesn't have to be made from a recording. Check out how court transcriptionists work. While I fully believe he recorded the call, there are other plausible answers and without a copy of the recording or him admitting it, we're just guessing.
- gralx 8y agoA semantic point: a stenographic transcript is a recording, just not an audio recording. Furthermore, court stenographers prepare the final transcript from an audio recording, and setting up and controlling the audio equipment to record court proceedings is one of the court stenographer's duties. Their in-court duties do, of course, include reading back statements made moments ago, which is much more practical to do from a page than from a recording, hence why voice-to-text software today and steno machines previously are so closely associated with court stenography.
- caseysoftware 8y agoThanks for the background and information. In this particular situation, the two-party consent laws revolve specifically around capturing audio in audio form, not writing.
- trothamel 8y agoDidn't he arrange to have the call transcribed on the fly, so he didn't have to record it?
- quadrangle 8y agoA live transcription is a recording.