5 ms·

> This may become a case of we don't enforce the laws against large companies. Why would Apple be a party here at all? Would Sony be a party if someone records

> This may become a case of we don't enforce the laws against large companies. Why would Apple be a party here at all? Would Sony be a party if someone records another with a walkman?

bryanrasmussen 6d ago
Apple is potentially a party because Apple processes and provides a recap of what was processed.
- jsw97 6d ago
  Even beyond this, if you create circumstances where mass commission of consequential felonies is an inevitable result, I suspect that is also illegal. 100% this just gets ignored by the Mass attorney general though.
  - skinfaxi 5d ago
    What is the law you are basing your theory?
- skinfaxi 5d ago
  Why would the manufacturer of a recording device be liable for its use counter to law?
  - bryanrasmussen 5d ago
    I have a hard time believing you are asking this question in good faith. However I will respond with what I might expect to see play out: If Sony makes a Walkman and you record with that Walkman it stays on that Walkman and you have a recording. After Sony sells you the Walkman Sony no longer interacts with you to record something, all of your recording is based on your deciding to record, and Sony has absolutely nothing to do with any recording you make. If you use Siri recap it moves between devices and Apple analyses it to give you a recap of what was said, obviously it is something that would need to be argued in court but depending on the pertinent state laws it seems reasonable to assume that it would be argued that Apple had the recording in its possession at one point, and that they did something on an individual basis with your recording. Sony does nothing individually with the recordings, Apple does, Apple Analyzes the recording and gives you a recap. Why would the company providing analysis of illegal recordings be liable if that's the product they're selling? Well, perhaps, as in the case of the MA statute quoted, there is something in the law saying if you do analysis of an illegal recording you are liable. That would be a pretty big "Why" in my experience. All of this is of course open to legal interpretation because in the U.S nobody knows for sure if it is legal or not until the rulings establish the precedent. However you can often guess pretty accurately. On edit: I had forgotten the exact content of the MA statute, going back and looking at it, it probably isn't a liability for Apple, but it isn't 100% sure it isn't (I'd say a pretty good chance though) plus as this is on a state basis, there could easily be another state that words things in such a way that it might more likely be a problem for Apple.
whoamii 6d ago
If the Walkman is recording all the time, then of course they would be a party.

> This may become a case of we don't enforce the laws against large companies. Why would Apple be a party here at all? Would Sony be a party if someone records another with a walkman?

bryanrasmussen 6d ago

Apple is potentially a party because Apple processes and provides a recap of what was processed.

jsw97 6d ago
Even beyond this, if you create circumstances where mass commission of consequential felonies is an inevitable result, I suspect that is also illegal. 100% this just gets ignored by the Mass attorney general though.
- skinfaxi 5d ago
  What is the law you are basing your theory?
skinfaxi 5d ago
Why would the manufacturer of a recording device be liable for its use counter to law?
- bryanrasmussen 5d ago
  I have a hard time believing you are asking this question in good faith. However I will respond with what I might expect to see play out: If Sony makes a Walkman and you record with that Walkman it stays on that Walkman and you have a recording. After Sony sells you the Walkman Sony no longer interacts with you to record something, all of your recording is based on your deciding to record, and Sony has absolutely nothing to do with any recording you make. If you use Siri recap it moves between devices and Apple analyses it to give you a recap of what was said, obviously it is something that would need to be argued in court but depending on the pertinent state laws it seems reasonable to assume that it would be argued that Apple had the recording in its possession at one point, and that they did something on an individual basis with your recording. Sony does nothing individually with the recordings, Apple does, Apple Analyzes the recording and gives you a recap. Why would the company providing analysis of illegal recordings be liable if that's the product they're selling? Well, perhaps, as in the case of the MA statute quoted, there is something in the law saying if you do analysis of an illegal recording you are liable. That would be a pretty big "Why" in my experience. All of this is of course open to legal interpretation because in the U.S nobody knows for sure if it is legal or not until the rulings establish the precedent. However you can often guess pretty accurately. On edit: I had forgotten the exact content of the MA statute, going back and looking at it, it probably isn't a liability for Apple, but it isn't 100% sure it isn't (I'd say a pretty good chance though) plus as this is on a state basis, there could easily be another state that words things in such a way that it might more likely be a problem for Apple.

whoamii 6d ago

If the Walkman is recording all the time, then of course they would be a party.