Shoutbox

Look at this http://www.bigblueball.com/news2/article.asp?id=554 I just wonder how you find out in your state.Might be a good idea to turn them off and for Patchou to add a statement that you might fry if you log your chats.

shut up! they got nottin on me hehehehe
b ut anyway its nice to know that i could end up in jail if i save them i guess ill check my states law*sigh* thats gonna be a lot of reading

at stupid US laws

If you chat you should know your conversation could easily be saved... And if you don't agree then you just shouldn't use it...
And how does the other person know that I'm logging the conversation if I just store it in my HD?

o and i found out by reading the article and it appears i am doing soemthing illegal. heres the entire paragraph and now i have to delete my chat sessions. *sigh* no more blackmailing from me. well anyway heres the paragraph.



Clearly Detective Warchol consented to the recording he made, and MacMillan had little expectation of privacy in the chat session. But New Hampshire, like many other U.S. states including California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Pennsylvania and WASHINGTON, requires all parties to the communication to consent to a recording before it is legal. And MacMillan, while engaged in the conversation with the putative 14-year-old, did not consent to recording the conversation.

I suggest to the read the original atricle, before jumping to conclussions (this goes for the guys that reported it to BigBlueBall and SlashDot aswell...)

quote:

---

It is useful to contrast the MacMillan case with one in 2002 in Washington state which has an even more stringent all-party consent statute. In that case, Donald Townsend engaged in an ICQ session with what he believed to be a 13-year-old girl, but was in fact an undercover police officer. In permitting the introduction of the recorded ICQ session, the court noted that the ICQ technology itself had a default setting to make a permanent record of the conversation. The court found that since Townsend should have known about the default setting, he effectively consented to the making of the recording under Washington's all-party consent statute.

In the AOL chat session, there was no such default recording, and therefore no consent by Mr. MacMillan. Therefore, the recording was illegal. The test seems to be whether the recording capability is part of the instant messaging software itself (in which case it may be legal to record) or whether it is an add-on, and therefore an unlawful recording. (Hmmm... this means if you use the Plus! logs it is illegal, if you use the MSN logs it is legal)

---

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by lopardo
And how does the other person know that I'm logging the conversation if I just store it in my HD?

---

Storing on HD IS logging...

That doesn't exactly make sense. I mean, MSN can log, it's built into MSN, so if you have an addon that logs as well, it's logging the same thing MSN is, so does it really matter? Who's to say that's illegal, it's doing the SAME exact thing. I could understand if perhaps the software doesn't come with logging by default...but when it does, is it really an issue?

i dont get that...its your comp u can do whatever you want. :bana:

quote:

---

Originally posted by CookieRevised
Storing on HD IS logging...

---

I meant the other person won't know if I'm logging the conversation, whether with Plus or by copy-pasting...

According to this article yes... But the thing is, when you sign up for any of this software, you know that it allows logging, MSN for example has the capability to log, regaurdless of if it is default or not, when you chat with someone you know they have the capability to be logging you, because it is built into MSN, even if they don't use Plus! Therefore if someone DOES use Plus!, and it is logging, the person doesn't necessarily know you are using Plus!, but they know you are using MSN, therfore they know that you have the potential to log them, it's like a nonverbal agreement...you just "know" they can log you...This all sounds so stupid

That's exactly what I was talking about...