Anonymous
05/06/2025 16:26
Subject: Expectation of Privacy in 'Public'
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You are recorded everywhere. How do you not know this? A conversation held in public is not private. Nothing is private anymore.
You are totally wrong. It’s illegal to record voices; it’s been part of Maryland law forever.
Are all of you mere children, who don’t remember Linda Tripp?
Linda Tripp was indicted in Maryland for illegally recording a voice telephone conversation with Monica Lewinsky without Lewinsky’s consent. Tripp secretly taped conversations with Lewinsky after Lewinsky revealed a sexual relationship with President Bill Clinton. Tripp's actions were illegal because they violated Maryland's wiretapping laws.
OP: your Rivian-owning friend is going to prison over what he did !
So what about Ring cameras, etc. those record voices. are those illegal in Maryland?
It's the public vs. private things. You can't go into someone's home and secretly record them without their consent. You have a reasonable expectation of privacy INSIDE your home or office. That expectation doesn't apply outside. Outside of your house = public as far as the law in concerned.
However, there have been some successful video with audio recording challenges in MD. The context of the conversation matters. If the conversation held in public was deemed to be private and confidential in nature and was illegally recorded, then the Rivian owner could get in trouble.
Just another aspect showing how our legal system has failed to keep up with technological changes adequately enough.
Can you cite to those cases? I would really LOVE to know as a resident of MD. If people want to stand in front of my house and have private conversations, that's on them. My Ring is recording, however, and it's perfectly legal.
People standing in front of a Ring NOT expecting to be recorded are complete and utter idiots. No matter where they live.
So? They still have RIGHTS, you know.
Anonymous
05/06/2025 16:26
Subject: Expectation of Privacy in 'Public'
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anyone who drives a giant truck in DC is going to have sh*t talked about them.
How does an owner of a Rivian not know this?
You think a Rivian is a “giant truck”?
FFS, what do you consider to be a “small truck” then?
DP.
Yes they are giant trucks. It’s awful!
No one needs these gigantic vehicles!!
Anonymous
05/06/2025 16:25
Subject: Expectation of Privacy in 'Public'
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You are recorded everywhere. How do you not know this? A conversation held in public is not private. Nothing is private anymore.
You are totally wrong. It’s illegal to record voices; it’s been part of Maryland law forever.
Are all of you mere children, who don’t remember Linda Tripp?
Linda Tripp was indicted in Maryland for illegally recording a voice telephone conversation with Monica Lewinsky without Lewinsky’s consent. Tripp secretly taped conversations with Lewinsky after Lewinsky revealed a sexual relationship with President Bill Clinton. Tripp's actions were illegal because they violated Maryland's wiretapping laws.
OP: your Rivian-owning friend is going to prison over what he did !
So what about Ring cameras, etc. those record voices. are those illegal in Maryland?
It's the public vs. private things. You can't go into someone's home and secretly record them without their consent. You have a reasonable expectation of privacy INSIDE your home or office. That expectation doesn't apply outside. Outside of your house = public as far as the law in concerned.
However, there have been some successful video with audio recording challenges in MD. The context of the conversation matters. If the conversation held in public was deemed to be private and confidential in nature and was illegally recorded, then the Rivian owner could get in trouble.
Just another aspect showing how our legal system has failed to keep up with technological changes adequately enough.
Can you cite to those cases? I would really LOVE to know as a resident of MD. If people want to stand in front of my house and have private conversations, that's on them. My Ring is recording, however, and it's perfectly legal.
People standing in front of a Ring NOT expecting to be recorded are complete and utter idiots. No matter where they live.
Agreed. Which is exactly my point.
Anonymous
05/06/2025 16:25
Subject: Expectation of Privacy in 'Public'
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You are recorded everywhere. How do you not know this? A conversation held in public is not private. Nothing is private anymore.
You are totally wrong. It’s illegal to record voices; it’s been part of Maryland law forever.
Are all of you mere children, who don’t remember Linda Tripp?
Linda Tripp was indicted in Maryland for illegally recording a voice telephone conversation with Monica Lewinsky without Lewinsky’s consent. Tripp secretly taped conversations with Lewinsky after Lewinsky revealed a sexual relationship with President Bill Clinton. Tripp's actions were illegal because they violated Maryland's wiretapping laws.
OP: your Rivian-owning friend is going to prison over what he did !
So what about Ring cameras, etc. those record voices. are those illegal in Maryland?
It's the public vs. private things. You can't go into someone's home and secretly record them without their consent. You have a reasonable expectation of privacy INSIDE your home or office. That expectation doesn't apply outside. Outside of your house = public as far as the law in concerned.
However, there have been some successful video with audio recording challenges in MD. The context of the conversation matters. If the conversation held in public was deemed to be private and confidential in nature and was illegally recorded, then the Rivian owner could get in trouble.
Just another aspect showing how our legal system has failed to keep up with technological changes adequately enough.
Can you cite to those cases? I would really LOVE to know as a resident of MD. If people want to stand in front of my house and have private conversations, that's on them. My Ring is recording, however, and it's perfectly legal.
People standing in front of a Ring NOT expecting to be recorded are complete and utter idiots. No matter where they live.
Anonymous
05/06/2025 16:24
Subject: Expectation of Privacy in 'Public'
Anonymous wrote:I don't know why so many people are talking about MD law, but DC is a one party consent state. In DC, you can be recorded in public OR IN PRIVATE as long as the person doing the recording knows it's happening.
None of that matters IN PUBLIC!!!!!
Anonymous
05/06/2025 16:24
Subject: Expectation of Privacy in 'Public'
Anonymous wrote:Some states have a policy they both parties have to agree to being recorded on a telephone. I don't know if this includes video but if it does then your paranoid friend could be in trouble.
Another one who has no idea how the law works. JFC, how can you people be this uninformed in this day and age when you're being recorded everywhere you go?????
Anonymous
05/06/2025 16:22
Subject: Expectation of Privacy in 'Public'
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You are recorded everywhere. How do you not know this? A conversation held in public is not private. Nothing is private anymore.
You are totally wrong. It’s illegal to record voices; it’s been part of Maryland law forever.
Are all of you mere children, who don’t remember Linda Tripp?
Linda Tripp was indicted in Maryland for illegally recording a voice telephone conversation with Monica Lewinsky without Lewinsky’s consent. Tripp secretly taped conversations with Lewinsky after Lewinsky revealed a sexual relationship with President Bill Clinton. Tripp's actions were illegal because they violated Maryland's wiretapping laws.
OP: your Rivian-owning friend is going to prison over what he did !
So what about Ring cameras, etc. those record voices. are those illegal in Maryland?
It's the public vs. private things. You can't go into someone's home and secretly record them without their consent. You have a reasonable expectation of privacy INSIDE your home or office. That expectation doesn't apply outside. Outside of your house = public as far as the law in concerned.
However, there have been some successful video with audio recording challenges in MD. The context of the conversation matters. If the conversation held in public was deemed to be private and confidential in nature and was illegally recorded, then the Rivian owner could get in trouble.
Just another aspect showing how our legal system has failed to keep up with technological changes adequately enough.
Can you cite to those cases? I would really LOVE to know as a resident of MD. If people want to stand in front of my house and have private conversations, that's on them. My Ring is recording, however, and it's perfectly legal.
Anonymous
05/06/2025 16:20
Subject: Expectation of Privacy in 'Public'
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You are recorded everywhere. How do you not know this? A conversation held in public is not private. Nothing is private anymore.
You are totally wrong. It’s illegal to record voices; it’s been part of Maryland law forever.
Are all of you mere children, who don’t remember Linda Tripp?
Linda Tripp was indicted in Maryland for illegally recording a voice telephone conversation with Monica Lewinsky without Lewinsky’s consent. Tripp secretly taped conversations with Lewinsky after Lewinsky revealed a sexual relationship with President Bill Clinton. Tripp's actions were illegal because they violated Maryland's wiretapping laws.
OP: your Rivian-owning friend is going to prison over what he did !
So what about Ring cameras, etc. those record voices. are those illegal in Maryland?
In Maryland shops, they have to turn off the sound-recordings on their CCTV cameras !
HAHHHAHAHAHHAHAHA a shop in not in a public space.
Anonymous
05/06/2025 16:19
Subject: Expectation of Privacy in 'Public'
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You are recorded everywhere. How do you not know this? A conversation held in public is not private. Nothing is private anymore.
You are totally wrong. It’s illegal to record voices; it’s been part of Maryland law forever.
Are all of you mere children, who don’t remember Linda Tripp?
Linda Tripp was indicted in Maryland for illegally recording a voice telephone conversation with Monica Lewinsky without Lewinsky’s consent. Tripp secretly taped conversations with Lewinsky after Lewinsky revealed a sexual relationship with President Bill Clinton. Tripp's actions were illegal because they violated Maryland's wiretapping laws.
OP: your Rivian-owning friend is going to prison over what he did !
Another ignoramus who didn't go to law school but thinks he knows how to interpret legal rulings. You do realize that neither Rivian not 100 other companies (Ring, for example) would not be able to exist if what you're saying were true. Recording someone in public is completely legal. Recording someone over the phone, or at home not so much.
Anonymous
05/06/2025 16:19
Subject: Expectation of Privacy in 'Public'
Anonymous wrote:Am I the only one who had to look up a Rivian?
Yes you are. I see them all the time but I had no idea they recorded 24/7. IDGAF but that's interesting to know.
Anonymous
05/06/2025 16:17
Subject: Expectation of Privacy in 'Public'
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You are recorded everywhere. How do you not know this? A conversation held in public is not private. Nothing is private anymore.
You are totally wrong. It’s illegal to record voices; it’s been part of Maryland law forever.
In public???? You're uninformed or delusional or both.
Anonymous
05/06/2025 16:03
Subject: Expectation of Privacy in 'Public'
Anonymous wrote:I don't know why so many people are talking about MD law, but DC is a one party consent state. In DC, you can be recorded in public OR IN PRIVATE as long as the person doing the recording knows it's happening.
That's not how one party consent works. The "one party" giving the consent has to be a participant in the conversation.
Anonymous
05/06/2025 16:02
Subject: Expectation of Privacy in 'Public'
Anonymous wrote:Anyone who drives a giant truck in DC is going to have sh*t talked about them.
How does an owner of a Rivian not know this?
You think a Rivian is a “giant truck”?
FFS, what do you consider to be a “small truck” then?
Anonymous
05/06/2025 15:49
Subject: Expectation of Privacy in 'Public'
That's why it's good to be able to speak a foreign language.
Anonymous
05/06/2025 15:42
Subject: Expectation of Privacy in 'Public'
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The only time I did something like this was when I was selling my house and I would watch the Ring camera footage and see all the conversations potential buyers would have on the front porch after touring. I didn't feel bad because the camera was so obvious and everyone knows about Ring doorbells.
Learn anything that helped your sale?
Yes, people were very open and I knew what was coming in terms of who would offer, etc.