wnp@relay.eu.net (wolf paul) (11/15/89)
langz@asylum.SF.CA.US (Lang Zerner) writes: > In article <telecom-v09i0497m07@vector.dallas.tx.us> John Tsang <jgt@uhccux. > uhcc.hawaii.edu> writes: > >[The only "drawbacks" to certain Panasonic answering machines is] > >the annoying beep during 2-Side-Conversation-Recording. > As for the beep while recording a conversation, well, it may be > annoying, but in the United States it is the law. And the moderator responds: > [Moderator's Note: I believe the law does not require the beep every > few seconds. It merely requires that both parties be *aware* of the > taping and consent to it. Therefore, if in the first few seconds of > the recording I say to you, "I am recording all this, is that okay > with you?" and you respond it is okay AND I have this consent itself > recorded at the start of the conversation, then the law has been > obeyed. The beeping every few seconds is of course one way to insure > the other person in theory knows about and has consented to be taped. > PT] But with the prevalent tort climate in the US, the only way the manufacturer of an answering machine/recording device can ensure that he will not be held liable for illicit recording is to supply this beep. Of course, in my opinion the manufacturer should not be liable for the illegal use a consumer may make of the product, but the courts in the US seem to be of a different opinion, as evidenced by a number of ridiculous decisions along these lines. Wolf N. Paul, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis Schloss Laxenburg, Schlossplatz 1, A - 2361 Laxenburg, Austria, Europe Phone: (Office) [43] (2236) 71521-465 (Home) [43] (1) 22-46-913 UUCP: uunet!mcvax!tuvie!iiasa!wnp DOMAIN: iiasa!wnp@tuvie.at
res@cblpe.att.com (Robert E Stampfli) (11/15/89)
>> >[The only "drawbacks" to certain Panasonic answering machines is] >> >the annoying beep during 2-Side-Conversation-Recording. >> As for the beep while recording a conversation, well, it may be >> annoying, but in the United States it is the law. Does the Panasonic beep more than once when recording a call as an answering machine? I know of no models that claim to do that. Legally, it would seem to me that this would still technically be a case of "recording a conversation", even if it is automated and one-sided. If it is truly a Federal law, why doesn't it apply in this case as well? Rob Stampfli / att.com!stampfli (uucp@work) / kd8wk@w8cqk (packet radio) 614-864-9377 / osu-cis.cis.ohio-state.edu!kd8wk!res (uucp@home) [Moderator's Note: It is 'recording a conversation', however your outgoing tape message informs the caller (in so many words) that his 'conversation' is being taped; his continuing to speak at that point would seem to imply his knowledge of and consent to the recording. It is the *knowledge and consent* that is required -- not the beeps. PT]
kanner@apple.com (Herbert Kanner) (11/16/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0509m01@vector.dallas.tx.us> iiasa!wnp@relay.eu.net (wolf paul) writes: >X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 9, issue 509, message 1 of 13 >langz@asylum.SF.CA.US (Lang Zerner) writes: >> In article <telecom-v09i0497m07@vector.dallas.tx.us> John Tsang <jgt@uhccux. >> uhcc.hawaii.edu> writes: >> >[The only "drawbacks" to certain Panasonic answering machines is] >> >the annoying beep during 2-Side-Conversation-Recording. >> As for the beep while recording a conversation, well, it may be >> annoying, but in the United States it is the law. >But with the prevalent tort climate in the US, the only way the >manufacturer of an answering machine/recording device can ensure that >he will not be held liable for illicit recording is to supply this >beep. >Of course, in my opinion the manufacturer should not be liable for the >illegal use a consumer may make of the product, but the courts in the >US seem to be of a different opinion, as evidenced by a number of >ridiculous decisions along these lines. It is interesting to note, in view of the above, that of the following list of machine brands that I have owned (and in most cases returned to the store) only the Panasonic emits the beep. AT&T top of the line machine Northwest Bell machine with time/day stamp Cobra with time/day stamp Record-a-Call (model over five years old) Panasonic with time/day stamp Herb Kanner Apple Computer, Inc. {idi,nsc}!apple!kanner kanner@apple.com
dave@uunet.uu.net (Dave Levenson) (11/18/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0512m08@vector.dallas.tx.us>, kanner@apple.com (Herbert Kanner) writes: > It is interesting to note, in view of the above, that of the following > list of machine brands that I have owned (and in most cases returned > to the store) only the Panasonic emits the beep. > AT&T top of the line machine > Northwest Bell machine with time/day stamp > Cobra with time/day stamp > Record-a-Call (model over five years old) > Panasonic with time/day stamp It would be interesting to learn why Herb returned so many machines to the store. The Panasonic unit I bought was very user-friendly -- it had one button that is used to play back all of the messages. But it only plays each message exactly once. No backspace, no save it for later. No listen again to get the number down. That's why I returned it (sorry, I don't remember the model number, but it was a two-line model). I recently brought home the AT&T 1330 (from Sears). This is an answering machine with an LCD display, solid-state storage of the outgoing announcement, and a single-cassette. The LCD displays the current time, or the time the message you're hearing was recorded, or soft labels for the five pushbuttons you use to administer the machine (I think it has more customer-administerable options than some AT&T business telephone systems!) It also voice time-stamps the messages on playback, in case you can't see the display. I think I'll keep this one. Dave Levenson Voice: (201) 647 0900 Westmark, Inc. Internet: dave@westmark.uu.net Warren, NJ, USA UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave [The Man in the Mooney] AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave [Moderator's Note: Well, as for me and my household (self, brother and his wife), we use voice mail from Centel....and love it. And they have a method of billing on miscellaneous accounts for non-Centel (phone) customers such as myself. So if you would like a 'presence' in the new 708 area code, and are willing to spring for $4.95 per month (ten messages, thirty seconds each; thirty second outgoing message) then contact Ms. O'Keefe, in the Business Office of Centel, 2004 Miner Street, Des Plaines, IL 60016. Phone 708-391-6536. You will get direct access to your mailbox with a number of the form 708-518-6xxx. For a demo of the system, call 708-518-6000. PT]