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...
/ 
