[asterisk-biz] Recording Consent (was: Re: [asterisk-users] snom 360: how to make record button working ?)

[Matthew Rubenstein]

	That page is useful for determining whether other parties must consent
to recordings on a call with all endpoints of *a wired line* in a single
state. Because then the state law applies to every part of the call,
without other state jurisdictions.

	But it addresses mobile phones only as radios in discussing how
parties' consent governs recording permission. It doesn't address what
happens when a mobile caller is in a state with different consent
requirements than another caller. And by extension (puns intended ;),
VoIP, where the geographical location of the caller can be hard to
prove, hard to even determine at all, and maybe hard to even be definite
in reality. What about when the recording Asterisk box is in a different
state, across the Internet, from the different people talking? And then
there's government "privileges", like the current controversy over NSA
wiretapping of people in different locations? And related jurisdiction
questions about governing calls passing through American
networks/servers, whose callers aren't even in the US? Do new Internet
gambling laws inform the structural policies?

	I expect that no one knows the answers to what a judge would say if
these recordings were introduced in a court, except in the simple case
of a single state with fixed terminals. Unfortunately, I expect this
list will see a lot of that education getting delivered over the next
several years at very high cost to everyone involved.


On Thu, 2006-10-05 at 10:01 -0700,
asterisk-users-request at lists.digium.com wrote:
> Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 11:10:00 -0400
> From: "Jay R. Ashworth" <jra at baylink.com>
> Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] snom 360: how to make record button
>         working ?
> To: asterisk-users at lists.digium.com
> Message-ID: <20061005151000.GL25559 at cgi.jachomes.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> 
> On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 07:17:47AM -0400, sip wrote:
> > That varies from location to location, really. In Georgia, for
> instance, only
> > ONE party need know the recording is taking place (calling or
> receiving)
> > without a warrant. In some countries, neither party need know, etc,
> etc. 
> 
> This page: 
> 
>         http://www.pimall.com/nais/n.recordlaw.html
> 
> purports to list the states that require all party consent.  It is
> from
> a private investigation site, and was the number one google hit, so it
> may be reliable.  This is not legal advice; IANAL.  If my advice
> breaks
> something, you get to keep both pieces, unless you paid me for it.
> 
> Cheers,
> -- jra
> -- 
> Jay R. Ashworth
> jra at baylink.com
> Designer                          Baylink
> RFC 2100
> Ashworth & Associates        The Things I Think
> '87 e24
> St Petersburg FL USA      http://baylink.pitas.com             +1 727
> 647 1274
> 
>         "That's women for you; you divorce them, and 10 years later,
>           they stop having sex with you."  -- Jennifer Crusie;
> _Fast_Women_
> 
-- 

(C) Matthew Rubenstein