Skip to main content

Federal law regarding taping without ones consent.

Submitted by an LD OnLine user on

Federal law makes it a crime to intentionally intercept, attempt to intercept or have someone else intercept on one’s behalf any wire, oral or electronic communication. It is also prohibited to intentionally use, attempt to use or have someone else use “any electronic, mechanical, or other device” to intercept an oral communication when the device is affixed to or otherwise transmits a signal through radio or through “a wire, cable, or other like connection” used in wire communication.
It is also illegal to intentionally use or disclose any information concerning the substance, purport or meaning of such a communication if one knows or has reason to know the information was obtained illegally.

Possession
It is illegal to possess a device if one knows or has reason to know that its design makes it “primarily useful for the purpose of the surreptitious interception of wire, oral, or electronic communications.” A police scanner that scans public radio frequencies as well as cellular frequencies is not generally considered an illegal device, but a scanner that scans only the cellular frequencies would be considered “primarily useful” for unlawful purposes. Illegal devices will be seized and forfeited, and violators will be fined according to the statute’s general terms, imprisoned for up to five years or both.

Criminal and civil penalties
A violation of the statute is punishable by a prison term of up to five years, a fine of up to $250,000 for individuals and $500,000 for corporations or both. Interception of the radio portion of a cellular or cordless telephone communication is punishable by a fine of from $500 to $250,000, but not incarceration.
Anyone whose communication is illegally intercepted, disclosed or used can sue for an injunction as well as to recover either actual damages plus any profits made by the violator or statutory damages, calculated at the rate of $100 per day of violation or $10,000, whichever is greater. Punitive damages, reasonable attorney’s fees and court costs are also available.
A civil action must be brought within two years of the date the person had a reasonable opportunity to discover the violation.

Sources
18 United States Code Sections 2510 through 2513, 2520, 2521, 3571 (1996); 47 United States Code Section 605; 47 Code of Federal Regulations Sections 2.701, 15.4, 15.9, 15.11, 15.104, 15.154 and 73.1206;

Aside from this federal law,there are also statewide statutes regarding this type of activity,which can only contain stronger and more restrictive regulations then federal law.

AND FERPA,Family Education and Privacy Act,protects all the other students in the classroom,who can not under Federal Law have their identity disclosed via tape recordings.Being a matter of invasion of privacy and confidentiality disclosed.

Submitted by Anonymous on Mon, 05/20/2002 - 6:21 AM

Permalink

Seems it’s ok for the Nazis to record us but we can’t record them. Then put the tape recorder in plain sight. Hey nothing happened to Linda Tripp for recording Monica Lewinski. That was federal statute. I use a tape recorder in my classes no one has ever questioned me. The law as usual is vague. Cops don’t get court orders to record to entrap with video. Was the guy who filmed Rodney King getting beaten break the law? What about hidden cameras in stores? LD kids should tape their classes and take notes on tape if it helps them. If a school objects to that then they are hiding something. Putting the tape recorder in plain sight should satisfy any legal crap. I also think ther could be a lot of wiggle room that would make recording a school classroom ok. It is reasonable to assume that students use tape recorders as part of note taking. The law is an ass in this case. When I was in school if a teacher objected my response would be “tough ship” If they tried to conficate it they’d end up in a coma. Sounds drastic but the slogan “Don’t tread on me” are words to live and die by.

Ive reread the statute and the way I see it, its ok to use a tape recorder if it’s not used in wire tapping. If a communication for example come thruogh an apartment wall you can record it. The same must hold true for a schoolroom. The federal statute you quote refers only to wire tap. Well thats my interpretation. I say hang em with their own words.

Submitted by Anonymous on Wed, 05/22/2002 - 10:19 AM

Permalink

What it actually states is “also” which means as well as,including,etc.

Actually Linda Tripp is in deep water and is now currently being sued in federal court regarding this illegal taping. So is the family in Florida who overheard the discussion between two top politicians.

There is a missing baby in my neck of the woods. 3 months old. Never did fing her,her parents were the prime suspects, was a big case. It got dismissed and if the parents are guilty is doesn’t matter anymore. Why was it thrown out? Because the police illegally recorded conversations in the house. You see they must get a court order to tape.

Back to Top