5 ms·
Thats only for private phone calls not for public spaces. Edit: Another commenter has made me aware that some states do ban non-consensual audio recordings in
by nerdsniper 1y ago
Thats only for private phone calls not for public spaces.
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.
- EvanAnderson 1y agoI could easily see a judge regarding the conversation over a drive thru speaker as not a public space and more like a telephone call.
- nerdsniper 1y agoEdit: Apparently 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.
- EvanAnderson 1y agoI wouldn't chance it. Stick an "audio may be recorded for performance evaluation purposes" on the drive thru kiosk and call it a day. Otherwise you're inviting litigation when something like this happens. You can want things to be black and white but litigators are going to argue.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- firesteelrain 1y agoNo expectation of privacy in public and video can be taken. For example, security cameras that also happen to capture audio.
- fragmede 1y agoin which jurisdiction? Just because there's a device that breaks the law doesn't make the law go away.
- firesteelrain 1y agoKatz v. United States (1967) Glik v. Cunniffe (1st Cir. 2011)
- ssl-3 1y agoI don't see how either of those cases apply to regular people making recordings of regular citizens (in public, or not) using a microphone.
- firesteelrain 1y agoI was referring to video with a camera which has a microphone
- ssl-3 1y agoAs was I. But to extend the context: I don't see the relationship of either of those cases to anything being discussed here at all.
- firesteelrain 1y agoDrive thru conversations are not private under the Katz test, so there is no reasonable expectation of privacy. That makes video or audio recording in that setting lawful. Katz came about because the FBI recorded a gambler outside the booth with the doors closed. Hence we have the Katz test. Heck, you can even record someone making a drive thru order yourself and no one can do anything about it
- ssl-3 1y ago