Massachusetts Wiretap Act (M.G.L. c. 272 s. 99)
All-party authority to record – Massachusetts Wiretap Act (M.G.L. c. 272 s. 99)

Massachusetts Wiretap Act (M.G.L. c. 272 s. 99) 99 C.1 oral: C.1 In-person speech: do not secretly record or listen with a device without the prior authority of all parties

A person must not wilfully secretly hear or secretly record another's spoken words with an intercepting device without prior authority from all parties. Because oral communication covers any speech not broadcast by radio, the protection does not depend on showing an expectation of privacy; what makes the recording unlawful is that it is secret. Open recording that the speakers know about is not an interception. For an employer this covers hidden microphones, audio-enabled CCTV without notice, and covert recording of interviews and meetings.

Maintained by Gerard Blokdyk

What else in your programme already covers this

This control maps to 1 controls across 1 other frameworks. If you already hold one of them, the evidence you collected for it is the starting point here rather than new work.

  • 2511(2)(d) 2511(2)(d) One-party consent: be a party or have a party's prior consent, and never for a criminal or tortious purpose

Every mapping shown was judged rather than inferred from wording similarity, and the ones that failed review are published too. See the coverage reports and what was rejected.

Other controls in All-party authority to record – Massachusetts Wiretap Act (M.G.L. c. 272 s. 99)

Query this from an agent

The graph holds this control, the 1 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.