Germany is a state of bipartisan consent – telephone recording without the consent of both parties or possibly several parties is a criminal offence according to § 201 StGB – Violation of speech confidentiality. Wiretaps by the authorities must be approved by a judge. Telephone recording by a private citizen may be permitted in case of self-defence, § 32 StGB or necessity § 34 StGB.  For the discussion of lawful interception in Germany, see de:Telecommunications surveillance. If the participants in a phone conversation are in different states, the chances of federal law being applicable to the situation increase, according to Matthiesen Wickert & Lehrer. Arkansas It is a crime in Arkansas when a person records oral or telephone communications in which they are not involved. “It`s usually legal to record a conversation in which all parties agree,” says Matthiesen Wickert & Lehrer. According to the Supreme Court of Cassation, recorded conversations are legal and can be used as evidence in court, even if the other party does not know that they have been recorded, provided that the party in charge of the recording participates in the conversation.  It is strongly recommended that you seek the assistance of your legal counsel. This is only a brief overview of the general laws of the State and not intended to serve as legal counsel. Nebraska It is legal to record any oral or telephone communication under Nebraska law with the consent of at least one party, provided that the recording is not made with criminal or unlawful intent. Illegal registration is a crime, except in specially enumerated circumstances where a first offence is a misdemeanour; it may also give rise to civil liability. The recording of telephone calls by individuals falls under the interception provisions of the Crimes Act 1961, which contains a general prohibition on the use of eavesdropping devices.
An exception is made if the person intercepting the call is a party to the conversation. It is not necessary for both parties to be aware of the interception.  South Dakota Under South Dakota law, it is a crime to record oral or telephone communications without the consent of at least one party. Although economic crimes and tax evasion were originally grounds for wiretapping, the government withdrew the same thing in 1999 on the basis of a Supreme Court decision citing the protection of individuals` privacy. The introduction of telephone communications technology has created an area where new laws need to be introduced to protect and secure the confidentiality of telephone communications while enabling security and policing by recording telephone conversations. Telephone recording laws vary by country or region. Some of the countries and regions with differences in telephone recording laws are: Australia, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Germany, India, Italy, Ireland, Latvia, New Zealand, Poland, Romania, Sweden, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States of America. Each region has different laws, including specifications on what can and cannot be registered and what can and cannot remain private for people in the call. Unfortunately, it is not always easy to say which right applies to a communication, especially a phone call.
For example, if you and the person you are hosting are in different states, it is difficult to predict in advance whether federal or state law applies, and whether state law applies, which of the two (or more) relevant state laws will control the situation. So, if you are recording a phone call with participants in more than one state, it is best to play it safe and get consent from all parties. However, if you and the person you are hosting are both in the same state, you can rely on the law of that state with greater certainty. In some states, this means that you can record communications with a party`s consent. In other cases, you still need to get everyone`s consent. Details of wiretapping laws in the fifteen most populous U.S. states and the District of Columbia can be found in the State Law: Recording section. In any case, it never hurts to play it safe and get consent from all parties to a phone call or conversation you want to record. Florida In Florida, it is illegal to record a face-to-face or telephone conversation without the consent of all parties. A violation of this Act constitutes an offence or a third-degree crime, depending on the offender`s intent and conviction history, and may also cause civil harm to the offender. Delaware At least one party must consent to the recording of personal or telephone conversations under Delaware law, even if the state`s laws are somewhat contradictory. Under the State Wiretapping Act, it is legal for someone to intercept a communication as long as they consent to it themselves or another party involved in the conversation and if the interception is not intended to promote criminal, illicit or illegal activities.
But under the state`s privacy law that is older, all parties to a conversation must agree to the recording. This is evidenced by a 1975 opinion of the Federal District Court of Delaware, U.S. v. Vespe, which interpreted the Privacy Protection Act as reflecting the federal rule that only one party must consent to the recording. A violation of the Interception Act is a criminal offence and can also serve as a basis for actual and punishable damages in civil proceedings. A violation of data protection law is a crime. When you`re on the phone, especially on a conference call, everyone needs to identify themselves from the beginning. Ask them to spell out their last name for clarity. However, it is illegal to record communications in which the receiving party does not participate.  Illegal registration can carry a prison sentence of up to five years. Section 183 (Part VI) of the Criminal Code also prohibits the secret recording of communications without the consent of one of the intended recipients.  Maryland All parties must consent to the recording of oral or telephone conversations under Maryland law, although the courts have interpreted this to be limited to situations where the parties have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Registration with criminal or unlawful intent is illegal regardless of consent. A violation of this law is a crime punishable by a fine and/or imprisonment and may also result in civil damage. Call recording laws in some U.S. states require only one party to be aware of the recording, while other states generally require both parties to be aware of it. Several States require all parties to agree if a party wishes to record a telephone conversation.  When we talk about state laws, why is federal law important? Federal law requires the consent of a party that allows you to record a conversation in person or by phone, but only if you participate in the conversation. If you are not part of the conversation but record it, then you are engaged in eavesdropping or illegal eavesdropping. It sounds simple, but if you`re “responsible” for a conversation that takes place in person or over the phone and you record it, then it`s your job to listen to what the other person or others are saying. Finally, you save the conversation to include information that you can reference later.
Calls and conversations from individuals can be recorded by any active participant. There is no legal obligation to make other parties aware of the recording, but the use of recordings, depending on their content, may be subject to various laws.  Utah In Utah, it is legal to record oral or telephone conversations with the consent of at least one party, provided there is no criminal or unlawful intent. Illegal recording is a crime in this context, unless it concerns the radio part of mobile phone communication, in which case it is a crime. The law also provides for civil liability. Federal law (18 U.S.C. § 2511) requires a party`s consent, which means you can record a phone call or conversation as long as you are involved in the conversation. If you are not involved in the conversation, you can only record a conversation or phone call if at least one party agrees and knows perfectly well that the communication will be recorded.
The law also prohibits the recording of conversations with criminal or unlawful intent. The interception of communications is covered by the provisions of the Criminal Code and, in the case of electronic communications, the Telecommunications Act (506/2004). The recording of a conversation by a private member of that conversation is expressly permitted. While these records are legal, their use may be subject to other civil or criminal law provisions. Their admissibility as evidence also depends on the circumstances.  If you plan to record phone calls or personal conversations (including recording videos that record sound), you should be aware that there are federal and state wiretapping laws that may limit your ability to do so. Not only do these laws expose you to lawsuits, but they can also give an aggrieved party a civil action for monetary damages against you. Louisiana Under Louisiana`s Electronic Surveillance Act, it is illegal to intercept or record oral, wired, or electronic conversations unless at least one party has consented. Offences may be punishable by fines, imprisonment and/or civil damages. In India, wiretapping must be approved by a designated authority. Otherwise, it is illegal.  The central or state government has the power to order the interception of messages under section 12, section 5 of the Indian Telegraph Act 1885.
 Sections 419 and 419A set out the procedure for intercepting and monitoring telephone messages. It is expected that a review committee will oversee the interception order.