4 ms·

In some jurisdictions it’s illegal to record a conversation without all-party consent. Example: https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/massachusetts/#s

In some jurisdictions it’s illegal to record a conversation without all-party consent. Example: https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/massachusetts/#summary https://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/massachusetts...

texasbigdata 4y ago
Pretty well known in the states, luckily he seems to be talking to himself :)
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
MikePlacid 4y ago
> The law only applies to secret recordings, however, so affirmative consent is not necessary when all parties are aware of the recording. Hm. Will a T-shirt with “my phone is recording everything” be enough? Interesting- secret recording is punished more severely than use of such recording. Logic? Also, the difference between image and sound recording. Secret image recording in public space is basically ok, while sound recording is not. That probably is caused by a wide availability of photo cameras, with known “fair uses”.
- light_hue_1 4y ago
  No. It's not enough to vaguely inform people. You must get their consent. T-shirts say lots of things that are hyperbole or bluster. Like "official boob inspector" is not generally understood to mean that you're announcing you literally are a licensed doctor.
  - MikePlacid 4y ago
    > You must get their consent. The article cites law, like with recent court cases. Let me add the exact court case they cite: The law only applies to secret recordings, however, so affirmative consent is not necessary when all parties are aware of the recording. Curtatone v. Barstool Sports, Inc., 169 N.E.3d 480, 483 (Mass. 2021). I am not trying to inform others of recording, actually, by my T-shirt sign. I trying to protect myself against the wrong law. If I was a lawmaker I would probably make all recording in public spaces legal. But if use of recording inflicts harm on you - you should be allowed to sue for damages. Probably you are already allowed anyway. Again: a harmful use of recording without concent or notification should be punished, not the recording itself. I think.
alach11 4y ago
These states are: California, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and Washington. Edit: I should add that in some of those states, it would still be permitted to record others in public without consent, where there's no reasonable expectation of privacy (e.g. a coffee shop or gas station).
phendrenad2 4y ago
Obviously the solution is for the government to record audio in all places at once, and then those with $$$$ can just pay for the audio feed. Win/win.

texasbigdata 4y ago

Pretty well known in the states, luckily he seems to be talking to himself :)

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

MikePlacid 4y ago

> The law only applies to secret recordings, however, so affirmative consent is not necessary when all parties are aware of the recording. Hm. Will a T-shirt with “my phone is recording everything” be enough? Interesting- secret recording is punished more severely than use of such recording. Logic? Also, the difference between image and sound recording. Secret image recording in public space is basically ok, while sound recording is not. That probably is caused by a wide availability of photo cameras, with known “fair uses”.

light_hue_1 4y ago
No. It's not enough to vaguely inform people. You must get their consent. T-shirts say lots of things that are hyperbole or bluster. Like "official boob inspector" is not generally understood to mean that you're announcing you literally are a licensed doctor.
- MikePlacid 4y ago
  > You must get their consent. The article cites law, like with recent court cases. Let me add the exact court case they cite: The law only applies to secret recordings, however, so affirmative consent is not necessary when all parties are aware of the recording. Curtatone v. Barstool Sports, Inc., 169 N.E.3d 480, 483 (Mass. 2021). I am not trying to inform others of recording, actually, by my T-shirt sign. I trying to protect myself against the wrong law. If I was a lawmaker I would probably make all recording in public spaces legal. But if use of recording inflicts harm on you - you should be allowed to sue for damages. Probably you are already allowed anyway. Again: a harmful use of recording without concent or notification should be punished, not the recording itself. I think.

alach11 4y ago

These states are: California, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and Washington. Edit: I should add that in some of those states, it would still be permitted to record others in public without consent, where there's no reasonable expectation of privacy (e.g. a coffee shop or gas station).

phendrenad2 4y ago

Obviously the solution is for the government to record audio in all places at once, and then those with $$$$ can just pay for the audio feed. Win/win.