home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky comp.org.eff.talk:8319 alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk:3858 comp.security.misc:2445 alt.privacy:2846 alt.society.civil-liberty:7267
- Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,comp.security.misc,alt.privacy,alt.society.civil-liberty
- Path: sparky!uunet!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!eff!kadie
- From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie)
- Subject: Re: Boycotting CERT because of the keystroke monitoring advisory?
- Message-ID: <1993Jan5.162622.11875@eff.org>
- Originator: kadie@eff.org
- Sender: usenet@eff.org (NNTP News Poster)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: eff.org
- Organization: The Electronic Frontier Foundation
- References: <1993Jan4.212439.4278@nntp.hut.fi> <1ib0grINNhq3@early-bird.think.com>
- Distribution: inet
- Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 16:26:22 GMT
- Lines: 30
-
- barmar@think.com (Barry Margolin) writes:
-
- [...]
- >We passed the CERT advisory on to our company lawyer. His opinion is that
- >the warning notice is unnecessary. The warning is based on wiretapping
- >statutes, which do not require a warning if the recording is being
- >performed by one of the parties to the conversation.
- [...]
-
- This is not law in Illinois. The law varies from state to state. Look
- in the front of your phone book for the law in your state. Here is the
- Illinois law (according to my phone book):
-
- "Recording Calls
-
- Recording conversations is not permitted unless:
-
- * All parties first consent either verbally or in writing, or
- * A distinctive tone sounds every 15 seconds during the recording, or
- * The party intending to record the converstation notified the other party
- -- at the beginning of the conversation -- that the call is being recorded.
-
- Exceptions include recording made by law enforcement officed and broadcast
- stations recording for the sole purpose of broadcast."
-
- - Carl
-
- --
- Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
- =kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
-