Man uses iPhone voice recorder to record Airport TSA rights violation & file lawsuit.

Discussion in 'iPhone' started by iphones4evry1, Jun 23, 2009.

  1. iphones4evry1 macrumors 65816

    iphones4evry1

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2008
    Location:
    California, USA
    #1
    The new 3.0 voice recorder can be used for more than just memos.

    I saw this on CNN television yesterday. A man used his iPhone to record the airport TSA violating his rights, and he is now using the iPhone recording in court to file a lawsuit.

    http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/06/20/tsa.lawsuit/index.html?section=cnn_latest#cnnSTCText

    Does anyone know... I thought recording a conversation was illegal? Don't the police always say on television "you are aware this is being recorded, right?" Does anyone know?
     
  2. jav6454 macrumors P6

    jav6454

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Location:
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
    #2
    Recording a conversation is not llegal if it's you hey are talking to. It's your evidence.

    Also this happen to Ron Paul campaign guy, so I can see this going big.
     
  3. MBHockey macrumors 68040

    MBHockey

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2003
    Location:
    New York
    #3
    It happened in march...must have been using a different app.
     
  4. deimos256 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2008
    #4
    I had heard that is legal to record audio or video without a persons knowledge as long as the two are not recorded together, but that doesnt sound right to me
     
  5. Mike2128 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    #5
    Varies by state. A lot of states say it's legal as long as one party knows. In this case, it would be illegal for you to record a conversation between two other people who don't have knowledge of the recording.
     
  6. deimos256 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2008
    #6
    that makes more sense, is there a lawyer in the house???
     
  7. entity macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Location:
    Detroit, MI
    #7
    How would that work for say.. a security camera at a store?
     
  8. deimos256 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2008
    #8
    most stores have signs notifying you of CCTV use
     
  9. Diode macrumors 68020

    Diode

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2004
    Location:
    Washington DC
    #9
    He was carrying a pocket edition of the U.S. Constitution AND just happens to be the director of development for the Campaign for Liberty? :rolleyes:

    I think there is more to the story then is reported ... i.e. he intentionally was trying to get TSA to antagonize him.
     
  10. SFStateStudent macrumors 604

    SFStateStudent

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2007
    Location:
    San Francisco California, USA
    #10
    Don't confuse illegal "wiretapping" with recording a conversation in public....:eek::eek::eek:
     
  11. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #11
    Do federal rules (which, I believe, require only unilateral consent) automatically apply to a situation with TSA agents performing federal duties inside an airport? Or, erm, for that matter, that's the rule for wiretapping (e.g. recording a phone conversation). Wiretapping / electronic monitoring rules don't really seem to apply... since there was no electronic communication taking place. This is just covert recording of an in-person conversation.

    Anyway, shock that it happened to a Ron Paulster. :p I would be surprised if anything overtly illegal happened, but I think they're within their rights to use this as leverage to make the TSA improve the specificity of its policies and also compliance with them.
     
  12. Sanveann macrumors 6502

    Sanveann

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2009
    Location:
    Michigan
    #12
    Yup ... that's what I learned in media law class back in college. In some states, both parties have to be aware that the call is being recorded; in other states, it's OK if it's just one party.
     
  13. TSX macrumors 68030

    TSX

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #13
    I wonder if he had Penn & Teller's metal pocket size card with the bill of right on it. Hopefully he brought up the 4th amendment.
     
  14. M-5 macrumors 65816

    M-5

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2008
    #14
    As far as I know, recording a conversation is not illegal as long as one party in the conversation is aware that it is being recorded.
     
  15. ddavid macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2008
    #15
    AND he just happened to have his iPhone set up to discreetly record... sounds like some lawyer got VERY lucky!
     
  16. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #16
    How was he harassed if TSA was within their right to screen and he didn't cooperate (too well)?
     
  17. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #17
    You mean in person? Because some states require both parties' consent if recorded over the telephone.
     
  18. loleries macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2009
    #18
    He had a bag of money. Unless a bag of money can be used as a weapon or to hijack a plane, they were way out of line.The job of the TSA inside of an airport is airport security. Not money laundering, counterfeit investigation, e.g. This is a clear cut win for the ACLU.


    It's like asking a plumber to repair your car.
     
  19. iphones4evry1 thread starter macrumors 65816

    iphones4evry1

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2008
    Location:
    California, USA
    #19
    I have an App for that. :D
    It's called "USA Manual" from iTunes.

    You will need to see the transcript or hear the recording (it was on CNN television, and probably on Youtube now). When they asked him questions that he thought was a violation of his rights, he replied "does this violate my rights?" The TSA employee replied with profanity demanding he answer the question, and never answered whether it violated his rights or not. Replying with profanity demanding an answer is not a violation, but the initial question might have been. One way or another, it was harassment. Would you want the TSA shouting profanity at you or your mother?
     

    Attached Files:

  20. sommls macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2008
    #20
    This is one of those not so infrequent times that groups usually not wanting to be in the same room with each other actually end up on the same side of an argument.

    You can already find the "freedom, tyranny and fascism" crowd on Fox News complaining in the same way as the ACLU does about people being detained without due process of law.

    It's interesting to see that, as good technology becomes widely available to people on the street, authorities who want to rewrite what really happened now more frequently get busted in the chops with hard data themselves.
     
  21. loleries macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2009
    #21
    Agreed, technology has really been a great tool in fighting corruption. How many public officials or instances of abuse have become public on as a result of video/audio?
     
  22. PNutts macrumors 601

    PNutts

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest, US
    #22
    Depending on the state the laws may be different for video vs. audio.
     
  23. kdarling macrumors demi-god

    kdarling

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2007
    Location:
    First university coding class = 46 years ago
    #23
    And even more interestingly, in a few states, NEITHER party needs to be aware of the telephone recording. This applies to situations where the person who pays for the phone line simply records anyone who uses it.

    As for the TSA incident, just watch it on TV. He was totally polite, while the TSA/etc agents swore at and tried to bully him. They were out of line, and at least one has already been disciplined.
     
  24. Michael CM1 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    #24
    Amen. Two totally different things. I don't think most media people could do their jobs if audio recording was banned in most public places. I think there has to be a sign saying it's banned, like in a courtroom. All I know is I'm ALWAYS going to use my recorder when I'm in an accident and get the other party to say IT'S HIS FAULT when it is. Hell, I want to have 360 degrees of video cameras since police and judges don't really care about finding out the truth as long as they get their $80.
     
  25. Nightmarerec0n macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2009
    #25
    Private Property rights I imagine...I think if it is you store, you video tape it if you want.
     

Share This Page