3 ms·
There’s no liability or exposure for recording non-consensually. It’s a public space. There’s not even an edge case. If a random member if the public could walk
by nerdsniper 1y ago
There’s no liability or exposure for recording non-consensually. It’s a public space. There’s not even an edge case. If a random member if the public could walk into the drive-thru (which they can) then anything can be recorded without notification or consent.
Edit: Another commenter has made me aware that some states do ban non-consensual audio recordings in public: https://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/massachusetts-recording-law https://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/massachusetts-recording-law
The laws prohibiting these recordings have neither been upheld nor overturned by the US Supreme Court.
- exegete 1y agoA restaurant drive thru is private property open to the public. I think there may be a legal difference there.
- nerdsniper 1y agoThere's generally not been held to be any difference for the purposes of expectation of privacy. If it's open to the public, the expectation is that anyone could overhear you.
- mixdup 1y ago>There’s no liability or exposure for recording non-consensually. It’s a public space. That is not how wiretapping laws work in every state.
- flimflamm 1y agoCreating a database of recordings without user being able to know/influence is clearly violation of GDPR IF there is PII. That's going to be costly for BK.
- nerdsniper 1y agoGDPR only exists in Europe. Are they doing this there too?