1

In Illinois, we have a two-party consent law on phone calls, requiring both parties to agree to being recorded. (Or, it seems, simply be told "This call may be recorded for ___ purposes", and you simply continue the phone call.

In Wisconsin, the law is one party. If I drive up to the Wisconsin border with my Illinois Phone number, what takes precedence for that phone call? The registered number's area (my Illinois area code), or the physical location I'm standing when making / receiving the call?

Also, when you state that the call is recorded for ___ purposes, does that have any bearing on the actual use (e.g. they state it is for quality assurance, but instead they use it for marketing, legal, etc)

Improve this question
1
  • 1
    You may wish to check this case: People v. Jansen, 561 N.E.2d 312, 314 (Ill. App. Ct. 1990). This is from a random site of the American Academy for Physicians and Surgeons, but it states "Illinois courts have found that the recording of a conversation by a party to the conversation is not a violation of the statute even if another party to the conversation is unaware of the recording." Definitely will want to check that the case law hasn't been deviated from and, of course, you should consult a local attorney before taking any sort of action.
    – A.fm.
    Dec 19, 2017 at 6:22

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
3

The first part is a matter of jurisdiction. I do not believe that simply using a cell phone with an Illinois number will give the Illinois courts jurisdiction, if you're standing in Wisconsin and calling a person in Wisconsin.

Also, when you state that the call is recorded for ___ purposes, does that have any bearing on the actual use (e.g. they state it is for quality assurance, but instead they use it for marketing, legal, etc)

The use can make a difference. There's an exemption in Illinois law if a business records if:

the monitoring is used for the purpose of service quality control of marketing or opinion research or telephone solicitation, the education or training of employees or contractors engaged in marketing or opinion research or telephone solicitation, or internal research related to marketing or opinion research or telephone solicitation

If they do not use it for these purposes, presumably the exemption would not apply. In addition:

No communication or conversation or any part, portion, or aspect of the communication or conversation made, acquired, or obtained, directly or indirectly, under this exemption (j), may be, directly or indirectly, furnished to any law enforcement officer, agency, or official for any purpose or used in any inquiry or investigation, or used, directly or indirectly, in any administrative, judicial, or other proceeding, or divulged to any third party.

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .