• Turret3857@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    this isn’t relevant to those of us in the USA, it looks to be for europeans, to save anyone in the US a click.

    • Hal@piefed.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      I guess not directly relevant, but the point is still there. The article basically came down to the fact that the guy was recording his neighbors’ conversations without consent.

      If I lived in the US I’d be checking laws before recording audio.

      I don’t live in the US or the EU and still disable audio in my cameras because of this.

      • Turret3857@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        most states in the US are one party consent recording states, whether thats a positive or not depends on the person you’re talking to.

        • Hal@piefed.nz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          So recording a conversation on your camera between two other parties still breaks the law in a one party consent state, because no party in the conversation has consented to the conversation being recorded.

          • Turret3857@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            Hmm… I suppose thats right. I’m not sure, I don’t actually know what would hold up in the US or not just due to how abysmal all of our privacy laws actually are. I’d hope that you’re right in that case though.