3 ms·
> California's wiretapping law is a "two-party consent" law. California makes it a crime to record or eavesdrop on any confidential communication, including a p
by darkpuma 7y ago
> California's wiretapping law is a "two-party consent" law. California makes it a crime to record or eavesdrop on any confidential communication, including a private conversation or telephone call, without the consent of all parties to the conversation. See Cal. Penal Code § 632. The statute applies to "confidential communications" -- i.e., conversations in which one of the parties has an objectively reasonable expectation that no one is listening in or overhearing the conversation.
- koolba 7y agoCommunication (say over the phone) is different than recording within the four walls of your home.
- zorpner 7y agoThis is addressed in the comment to which you are replying by the prepositional phrase "including a private conversation".
- koolba 7y agoThat’s interesting. I’d have imagined it to be superseded by the castle doctrine.
- User23 7y agoI’d imagine more of an implied consent angle. In any event the truly paranoid can just put a small notice on the door.
- dodobirdlord 7y agoIt's sort of a chicken-and-egg scenario. Once someone tells you that there's an active recording device it's no longer a "confidential communication" because you no longer have an "objectively reasonable expectation that no one is listening in or overhearing the conversation". You don't have to stop recording just because someone wants you to stop, you just can't do it without being upfront about it. Home assistant devices are common enough (ads in the superbowl!) that I imagine a judge would consider the physical presence of the device as being reasonable indication that there is no "objectively reasonable expectation that no one is listening in or overhearing the conversation".