Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Its-me-big-dee t1_j22apwd wrote

Not a lawyer, but I believe this has everything to do with the nature in which the video was made, or the physical area in which it was made (expectation of privacy). If the person who is in the video is streaming it, or published it on social media themselves, then no, it’s not a violation. Pennsylvania is a two party state, just meaning that both parties, the person being recorded and the person doing the recording both have to agree to the recording. Again not a lawyer, this is just my very basic understanding of the law.

6

fifty2weekhi t1_j22glls wrote

What's remarkable is that at work during a webinar where dozens of people attend, the host still has to announce the webinar is being recorded. I'd think there's no assumption of privacy in a webinar setting.

−3

IrrumaboMalum t1_j22ik4b wrote

Being at work would imply that you have a reasonable expectation of privacy, unless that work is in a highly public setting or the training was being conducted in a public setting (such as a public auditorium that was rented for the event) instead of a private setting (such as in a conference room not accessible by the public).

6

interestedfluffydog t1_j22k6vw wrote

Not 100% related to the initial post, but is related to this portion... my job announces that they are recording a webinar/lecture/training etc because it will be posted later for others to watch or listen to. Thus, not only do you consent for those present to hear and see you interact with this material, you are consenting for all future parties who will later watch the recording... hope that makes sense.

4

xeio87 t1_j233fqe wrote

Web meetings will also often take into account that participants may be from other states, usually the policy is designed with the most restrictive state laws in mind which may not be PA.

1

feudalle t1_j22e212 wrote

Also not a lawyer but I think it comes down to expectation of privacy. If I'm on a public street a local business can record me from their security camera. I can't reasonably assume things I do in public are private. Vs having a phone call with a friend, I can assume its private.

6

fifty2weekhi t1_j22goag wrote

[copied from above] What's remarkable is that at work during a webinar where dozens of people attend, the host still has to announce the webinar is being recorded. I'd think there's no assumption of privacy in a webinar setting.

−5

IrrumaboMalum t1_j22idh6 wrote

I think the biggest factor is where the filming is conducts.

If you are in a public venue with no reasonable expectation of privacy, then it does not apply.

But if you are in a private setting with a reasonable expectation of privacy, then it does apply.

3

worstatit t1_j23lccf wrote

It's a complex law, but it's basically audio recordings of a surreptitious nature where one has a reasonable expectation of privacy. It's a wiretapping law and dates to the hard line phone tap days, thus quite archaic.

2

psc1919 t1_j23ujvi wrote

First, it only applies to audio. So if there was no audio recorded and only video, then there is no possible violation.

Second, there must be a reasonable expectation of privacy where the recording is taken. Although that is case by case basis, that is basically never anywhere in public setting.

1