| I actually read through that entire document out of curiosity. As far as I can tell it only applies to audio recording (and telegraphs, and cable TV, and a couple other misc items, but not video from what I see). Also, there's the bit right at the top: > Therefore, it is not the intent of the Legislature to place greater restraints on the use of listening devices and techniques by law enforcement agencies than existed prior to the effective date of this chapter. I'm not sure how large or small that loophole is according to the courts. ----- Then as I was glancing through it, I noticed that this is the law that makes CA a two party consent state: §632(a) > without the consent of all parties to a confidential communication §632(d) > evidence obtained as a result of eavesdropping upon or recording a confidential communication in violation of this section is not admissible So that sucks. §633.5 > do not prohibit one party to a confidential communication from recording the communication for the purpose of obtaining evidence reasonably believed to relate to the commission by another party to the communication of the crime of But at least it's slightly better as of... 2018. It only took them until 2018 to add that. FFS. ----- This one was a pleasant surprise though: §637.7 > No person or entity in this state shall use an electronic tracking device to determine the location or movement of a person. So is it a misdemeanor to track your child via their cellphone in CA? I'm also wondering about all that cell phone location data that was sold (https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/a3b3dg/big-teleco...). Have I misunderstood something? |
It's worth looking at the whole section:
I guess it depends on how you define "vehicle or other movable thing". Children are technically things and they are technically movable, so if the child didn't consent to being tracked, I guess it's technically illegal (and since a child probably does not fit the definition of "vehicle", it's not sufficient for the "owner, lessor, or lessee" of a child - i.e. a parent or guardian - to provide that consent).However, IIRC there are a lot of cases where a parent's consent is considered to be equivalent to the child consenting, and this might be one of them; as long as the parent consents to the child being tracked, it'd be legal in such a case.
Obligatory "I ain't a lawyer".