Thomas and Nanci Kuykendall

><< I believe it is a violation of someone's privacy rights to tape them
>without
> their consent.... but I'm not a lawyer, so look for a source of better
> information. I don't think you would be able to admit the tapes as
>evidence. >>

I don't think that an answering machine qualifies. By nature it is
designed to tape you, and if you leave a message on it, you are aware that
you are being recorded for later playback. As such, would it not exceed
the reasonable expectation of privacy and fall under public domain?

Nanci K. in Idaho

[email protected]

In a message dated 9/27/99 8:11:52 AM, tn-k4of5@... writes:

<<I don't think that an answering machine qualifies. By nature it is
designed to tape you, and if you leave a message on it, you are aware that
you are being recorded for later playback. As such, would it not exceed
the reasonable expectation of privacy and fall under public domain?
>>

Good point. I guess I was thinking of using the machine to surreptitiously
record a phone conversation. That would be sneaky. But what you said sounds
reasonable.

Betsy

[email protected]

In a message dated 9/27/99 11:12:04 AM Central Daylight Time,
tn-k4of5@... writes:

<< I don't think that an answering machine qualifies. By nature it is
designed to tape you, and if you leave a message on it, you are aware that
you are being recorded for later playback. As such, would it not exceed
the reasonable expectation of privacy and fall under public domain?
>>

Nanci,
This is what I thought! Thank you for agreeing with me. Of course,
that may not make it right, as we aren't exactly attorneys :) I can't
help but feel that there is truth to your observation however.
Tami