3 ms·

In Sweden it's legal to record any conversation you are part of, secretly recording as a third party is not. Just common sense really. Just sayin'

gamepsys 3y ago
Sometimes in a private conversation I will say things I would not want the public to hear me say. In places where there is one party consent it requires much more trust to have these types of private conversations, because any conversation could be recorded and placed on twitter. For example, I think it's awful that in some places it's legal to privately tell you friend about a mental health struggle you are having, and for that friend to, without your knowledge, share a recording of that conversation with other people. In my mind two party consent is a basic data-privacy law. You cannot create a record of something you expected to be private. You can have an expectation of a private conversation to be private.
- judge2020 3y ago
  What a bad take. Private doesn’t mean “off the record”. Making it so that you can’t record unless you ask the other party for consent to record makes it harder to hold people accountable for their actions, gather proof of labor law violations, and confess to other types of crimes. If you’re saying something that “could be placed on twitter”, maybe reflect on the harm your statement is causing that the rest of society agrees about. Even if this was a law, the only defense is suing anyone who records your conversation and brings it to the limelight - the JKR approach.
- planede 3y ago
  Taking a recording and sharing the recording are two different things. I think the intention universally is to deter from sharing the recording. Punishing taking the recording is also a way to do that, but I don't see much harm in having private recordings for personal use.
o11c 3y ago
That's the same as one-party consent (that is, one of the parties having the conversation, not random passersby), which in the US applies federally as well as in about 3/4 of the states. But most states - whether one-party or two-party - do not require consent to record a broad swathe of exceptions (particularly extortion, but not just that). Exact laws vary quite a bit - honestly one of the worst things about America is how different laws (of all sorts) can be in different jurisdictions.

gamepsys 3y ago

Sometimes in a private conversation I will say things I would not want the public to hear me say. In places where there is one party consent it requires much more trust to have these types of private conversations, because any conversation could be recorded and placed on twitter. For example, I think it's awful that in some places it's legal to privately tell you friend about a mental health struggle you are having, and for that friend to, without your knowledge, share a recording of that conversation with other people. In my mind two party consent is a basic data-privacy law. You cannot create a record of something you expected to be private. You can have an expectation of a private conversation to be private.

judge2020 3y ago
What a bad take. Private doesn’t mean “off the record”. Making it so that you can’t record unless you ask the other party for consent to record makes it harder to hold people accountable for their actions, gather proof of labor law violations, and confess to other types of crimes. If you’re saying something that “could be placed on twitter”, maybe reflect on the harm your statement is causing that the rest of society agrees about. Even if this was a law, the only defense is suing anyone who records your conversation and brings it to the limelight - the JKR approach.
planede 3y ago
Taking a recording and sharing the recording are two different things. I think the intention universally is to deter from sharing the recording. Punishing taking the recording is also a way to do that, but I don't see much harm in having private recordings for personal use.

o11c 3y ago

That's the same as one-party consent (that is, one of the parties having the conversation, not random passersby), which in the US applies federally as well as in about 3/4 of the states. But most states - whether one-party or two-party - do not require consent to record a broad swathe of exceptions (particularly extortion, but not just that). Exact laws vary quite a bit - honestly one of the worst things about America is how different laws (of all sorts) can be in different jurisdictions.