Telephone call recording laws

all-party consent recording lawsanti-wiretapping lawillegally record telephone conversationslaw against tapinglegally valid recordingTelephone recording lawstelephone voice recordingtwo party consent
Telephone call recording laws are laws that govern the privacy of telephone communications, including the recording of conversations.wikipedia
44 Related Articles

Telephone tapping

wiretapwiretappingwiretaps
Recording of private conversations by government or law enforcement (wiretapping) are usually covered by distinct laws.
The telephone call recording laws in most U.S. states require only one party to be aware of the recording, while twelve states require both parties to be aware.

Democracy

democraticdemocraciesdemocratically
Telephone tapping is strictly regulated in many countries, especially in all developed democracies, to safeguard the privacy of telephone users.

Privacy

privatepersonal privacyprivacy rights
Telephone tapping is strictly regulated in many countries, especially in all developed democracies, to safeguard the privacy of telephone users.

Court

court of lawcourtscourts of law
Telephone tapping often must be authorized by a court, and is normally only approved when evidence shows it is not possible to detect criminal or subversive activity in less intrusive ways; often the law and regulations require that the crime investigated must be at least of a certain severity.

Evidence (law)

evidencerules of evidencelaw of evidence
Telephone tapping often must be authorized by a court, and is normally only approved when evidence shows it is not possible to detect criminal or subversive activity in less intrusive ways; often the law and regulations require that the crime investigated must be at least of a certain severity.

Crime

criminalcriminalscriminal offence
Telephone tapping often must be authorized by a court, and is normally only approved when evidence shows it is not possible to detect criminal or subversive activity in less intrusive ways; often the law and regulations require that the crime investigated must be at least of a certain severity.

Subversion

subversivesubversivessubversive activities
Telephone tapping often must be authorized by a court, and is normally only approved when evidence shows it is not possible to detect criminal or subversive activity in less intrusive ways; often the law and regulations require that the crime investigated must be at least of a certain severity.

Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act

PIPEDAPIPAfederal level
In Canada, organizations subject to the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) must comply with PIPEDA when recording calls.

Criminal Code (Canada)

Criminal CodeCriminal Code of CanadaCanadian Criminal Code
Section 183 (Part VI) of the Criminal Code also outlaws surreptitious recording of communications without consent of one of the intended recipients.

Strafgesetzbuch

German Criminal CodeGerman Penal CodeStGB
201 of the German Criminal Code —violation of the confidentiality of the spoken word.

Supreme Court of Cassation (Italy)

Court of CassationSupreme Court of CassationCorte di Cassazione
According to the Supreme Court of Cassation, recorded conversations are legal and can be used as evidence in court, even if the other party is unaware of being recorded, provided that the recording party takes part of the conversation.

Crimes Act 1961

Crimes ActNew Zealand Crimes Act 19611961 Crimes Act
Recording of phone calls by private persons falls under interception-related provisions of the Crimes Act 1961, which has a general prohibition on the use of interception devices.

Polish Penal Code

Criminal Codepenal codePoland’s criminal code
According to Polish Penal Code (art.

Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000

Regulation of Investigatory Powers ActRIPAUK Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000

Tort

tort lawtortstortfeasor
Under RIPA unlawful recording or monitoring of communications is a tort, allowing civil action in the courts.

Financial Services Authority

FSASecurities and Investments BoardFCA
It is sometimes mandatory; from March 2009 Financial Services Authority rules required firms to record all telephone conversations and electronic communications relating to client orders and the conclusion of transactions in the equity, bond, and derivatives markets.

Supreme Court of the United States

United States Supreme CourtU.S. Supreme CourtSupreme Court
In Rathbun v United States, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in regard to interstate or foreign communication that "the clear inference is that one entitled to receive the communication may use it for his own benefit or have another use it for him. The communication itself is not privileged, and one party may not force the other to secrecy merely by using a telephone. It has been conceded by those who believe the conduct here violates Section 605 [of the Federal Communication Act] that either party may record the conversation and publish it."

Title 18 of the United States Code

Title 1818 U.S.C.18 U.S.C.: Crimes and Criminal Procedure
Federal law requires that at least one party taking part in the call must be notified of the recording (18 U.S.C. §2511(2)(d)).

National Do Not Call Registry

United States National Do Not Call RegistryDo-Not-Call Implementation Act of 2003Do Not Call
Telephone scammers and others intentionally violating the federal Do Not Call list may try to locate in those states, or use their area codes.

Supreme Court of California

California Supreme CourtChief Justice of CaliforniaSupreme Court
The California Supreme Court ruled in 2006 that if a caller in a one-party state records a conversation with someone in California, that one-party state caller is subject to the stricter of the laws and must have consent from all callers (cf.

Kidnapping

kidnapkidnappedabduction
However, non-disclosure recordings by one of the parties can legally be made if the other party is threatening kidnapping, extortion, bribery, human trafficking, or other felony violence.

Extortion

extortextortingextorted
However, non-disclosure recordings by one of the parties can legally be made if the other party is threatening kidnapping, extortion, bribery, human trafficking, or other felony violence.

Bribery

bribebribesbribing
However, non-disclosure recordings by one of the parties can legally be made if the other party is threatening kidnapping, extortion, bribery, human trafficking, or other felony violence.