[Political Junkie Too]

I would assume that consent was given, since Megyn Kelly was there to record an interview between the two of them.

The question is whether the consent is global. In other words, if both parties know that their conversation is being recorded due to it being an interview being recorded by one of the parties, does that consent apply to the other party secretly recording the interview, too? After all, it is known that the conversation is being recorded, so it's only fair that both parties make a record of it.

I would think this extends to police bodycams, too. If the police officer knows the encounter is being recorded because he's wearing a bodycam, then is it legal for you to record the encounter, too, in case the police tamper with the bodycam recording later? After all, both parties already know the encounter is being recorded by one of them, so it should be legal for all of them to record the encounter, right?

-PJ

[for-q-clinton]

Bodycams are a bit different. That falls under anything in public can be recorded scenario (in most states). Other than bathrooms and locker rooms, one does not have a reasonable right to privacy while in public.

I’m sure it can get dicey if you record someone whispering at a dinner table at Olive Garden, but anything loud enough to be heard is considered free game.

[Roccus]

Oooops, posted my #62 before I got to your post. I only viewed replies to #24