Call Recording Laws in the US
So I've been thinking about call recording laws recently and wanted to get some feedback. 1. As an ITSP, are we held liable for enabling our customers to potentially illegally record a phone call in states where all-party notification is required? Or is it solely on the party who did the illegal recording? 2. Interstate phone calls get tricky -- it may be legal for single-party notification in the originating or terminating state, but illegal in the other. 3. When a California resident has a California phone number (a state which requires all-party notification and consent of call recording) receives a call when physically in Oregon, which law applies -- CA or OR? Assuming the caller is in a single-party consent state. Makes things kinda difficult -- I guess it is simply easier for the ITSP to say "hey, you can record, but follow the laws." and hope we don't get mixed up in it. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Beckman Internet Guy beckman at angryox.com http://www.angryox.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
How does being an ITSP differ from a traditional telephone service provider when it comes to call recording laws? It would seem precedent has been set in the past for these types of activities. What those precedents are, I have no idea, but just because the call goes over "the internet" versus a copper pair to the local central office would not change things in my opinion. Or am I too naive when it comes to this topic? I imagine if I was a Fairpoint retail customer of a POTS and I called and asked about this topic they would tell me to get a lawyer and otherwise ignore me. As an employee of an ISP I would never tell a customer you can record but please follow the laws. I would say consult a lawyer. matt On Wed, 13 Jan 2010, Peter Beckman wrote:
So I've been thinking about call recording laws recently and wanted to get some feedback.
1. As an ITSP, are we held liable for enabling our customers to potentially illegally record a phone call in states where all-party notification is required? Or is it solely on the party who did the illegal recording?
2. Interstate phone calls get tricky -- it may be legal for single-party notification in the originating or terminating state, but illegal in the other.
3. When a California resident has a California phone number (a state which requires all-party notification and consent of call recording) receives a call when physically in Oregon, which law applies -- CA or OR? Assuming the caller is in a single-party consent state.
Makes things kinda difficult -- I guess it is simply easier for the ITSP to say "hey, you can record, but follow the laws." and hope we don't get mixed up in it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Beckman Internet Guy beckman at angryox.com http://www.angryox.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
In many cases, the call recording is provided by the softswitch or conference bridge by the ITSP. ILEC's don't provide call recording on TDM. Matt Yaklin wrote:
How does being an ITSP differ from a traditional telephone service provider when it comes to call recording laws? It would seem precedent has been set in the past for these types of activities. What those precedents are, I have no idea, but just because the call goes over "the internet" versus a copper pair to the local central office would not change things in my opinion.
Or am I too naive when it comes to this topic? I imagine if I was a Fairpoint retail customer of a POTS and I called and asked about this topic they would tell me to get a lawyer and otherwise ignore me.
As an employee of an ISP I would never tell a customer you can record but please follow the laws. I would say consult a lawyer.
matt
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010, Peter Beckman wrote:
So I've been thinking about call recording laws recently and wanted to get some feedback.
1. As an ITSP, are we held liable for enabling our customers to potentially illegally record a phone call in states where all-party notification is required? Or is it solely on the party who did the illegal recording?
2. Interstate phone calls get tricky -- it may be legal for single-party notification in the originating or terminating state, but illegal in the other.
3. When a California resident has a California phone number (a state which requires all-party notification and consent of call recording) receives a call when physically in Oregon, which law applies -- CA or OR? Assuming the caller is in a single-party consent state.
Makes things kinda difficult -- I guess it is simply easier for the ITSP to say "hey, you can record, but follow the laws." and hope we don't get mixed up in it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Beckman Internet Guy beckman at angryox.com http://www.angryox.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
I think the point is significant because with a VoIP service you have the potential for your customer to be physically located anywhere in the country or world, regardless of what number they are using to make or receive calls. Are the laws are associated with physical location or with the "location" of the DID? :Luke Marrott On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 1:36 PM, Matt Yaklin <myaklin at g4.net> wrote:
How does being an ITSP differ from a traditional telephone service provider when it comes to call recording laws? It would seem precedent has been set in the past for these types of activities. What those precedents are, I have no idea, but just because the call goes over "the internet" versus a copper pair to the local central office would not change things in my opinion.
Or am I too naive when it comes to this topic? I imagine if I was a Fairpoint retail customer of a POTS and I called and asked about this topic they would tell me to get a lawyer and otherwise ignore me.
As an employee of an ISP I would never tell a customer you can record but please follow the laws. I would say consult a lawyer.
matt
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010, Peter Beckman wrote:
So I've been thinking about call recording laws recently and wanted to get
some feedback.
1. As an ITSP, are we held liable for enabling our customers to potentially illegally record a phone call in states where all-party notification is required? Or is it solely on the party who did the illegal recording?
2. Interstate phone calls get tricky -- it may be legal for single-party notification in the originating or terminating state, but illegal in the other.
3. When a California resident has a California phone number (a state which requires all-party notification and consent of call recording) receives a call when physically in Oregon, which law applies -- CA or OR? Assuming the caller is in a single-party consent state.
Makes things kinda difficult -- I guess it is simply easier for the ITSP to say "hey, you can record, but follow the laws." and hope we don't get mixed up in it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Beckman Internet Guy beckman at angryox.com http://www.angryox.com/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
participants (4)
-
beckman＠angryox.com -
luke.marrott＠gmail.com -
myaklin＠g4.net -
peter＠4isps.com