3 ms·
The part of this article that most interests me is that Virginia is a "one-party consent" state for audio recordings, meaning that only one party has to consent
by stephengillie 11y ago
The part of this article that most interests me is that Virginia is a "one-party consent" state for audio recordings, meaning that only one party has to consent for the recording to be legal.
It seems like that's a law that's going to be more important as recording devices become ubiquitous. Will Virginia change to a "two-party consent" state, or will other states join Virginia? Or we just remain a landmass where recording others is allowed in some places but not other places?
How soon until we have an iWatch that's always streaming audio and video to a cloud server? (Dependent question: How much energy is used to record an image from a sensor, process, frame, and route over Wifi or Cell?)
Also, there's the moral question of recording another's audio without their consent. How do we decide (or re-decide) what the moral rules for recording should be?
- duskwuff 11y agoQ: Does it still count as "one-party consent" if the 'consenting' party isn't involved in (or, for that matter, even aware of) the conversation s/he is recording? One-party consent certainly wouldn't apply if, for instance, your friend made a call using your telephone and you recorded the ensuing conversation. Does this situation differ simply because the patient was physically present?
- ars 11y agoMost states are one party states, only a few are left that are all party. I believe the trend is toward one party.