In Common Law, Forced Adoptions, Health, Radio Shows, State Corruption, Survivors, uk recording laws

Can you record phone calls without consent in the UK? Yes. Do you need permission NO. Can you publish. YES Only in a public interest case or criminal matter seek legal advise before publishing or giving to a third party.

Most Councils are breaking uk law with this policy here.

Are Councils and all public servants hiding behind unacceptable behaviour policies and vexatious laws.

unacceptable behaviour policies Examples  will download.



How can the state blame a man for its policies and procedures and use him as a scapegoat.





visitor counter

Put simply recording by an individual is not restricted at all, either openly or covertly provided it is a conversation they are involved with, which includes any meeting or telephone conversation, they do not need to inform others or seek their permission.

In terms of the Data Protection Act 1998

36 Domestic purposes.

Personal data processed by an individual only for the purposes of that individual’s personal, family or household affairs (including recreational purposes) are exempt from the data protection principles and the provisions of Parts II and III.

As meetings would be for matters involving themselves or their family they are entirely exempt.

There is similar regarding The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (c.23) (RIP or RIPA)

As a person is not acting for an organisation it does not apply to them.

There are only two exceptions:

1. MOD Premises no recording allowed
2. A Court of Law where permission has not been given.

Put simply a private person can record at will and this would include at any meeting and contact centres, taking pictures, video etc there are not in law what would be known as bugging and no one can forbid them as some LA’s are doing.

In fact to forbid or sanction could be an offence under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 as amended

Section 1 (1A)& 2

(1A) A person must not pursue a course of conduct –
(a) which involves harassment of two or more persons, and
(b) which he knows or ought to know involves harassment of those persons, and
(c) by which he intends to persuade any person (whether or not one of those mentioned above)-
(i) not to do something that he is entitled or required to do, or
(ii) to do something that he is not under any obligation to do

(2) For the purposes of this section, the person whose course of conduct is in question ought to know that it amounts to or involves harassment of another if a reasonable person in possession of the same information would think the course of conduct amounted to or involved harassment of the other

Some local authorities have policies that breach criminal law (see below at end of this communication) and the the quote from below “Service users should understand that Judges are highly unlikely to accept covert recordings as evidence in court.” is clearly wrong and there are many cases of judges ruling the opposite, though the normal protocol would be that a recording is transcribed and if there is dispute a copy of the recording provided.

Service users would not have to provide a copy as it would be their own copywrited material, they can charge for a copy and use by others as well, though obviously there would be restrictions in law as to its use, ie publication etc.

We would like to work with you on developing a fit for purpose policy, at least in regard to service users if not also for staff doing such, so staff and SW/other staff can be properly informed.

We think that it could be considered good policy to:

A. Inform Users they can and the framework of law and rights etc
B. LA’s to consider a framework for they own recording and service user access to those

As these could provide not only protection to service users, in disputes about what was said or was out in a report or as in the e links regarding  protection from serious false hoods, but also protection for LA staff and the Local Authority it’s self from either or both of unscrupulous services users or staff and aid dealing with complaints, an insurance policy and training and review aid.

Perhaps we could work with you to help develop the model that the rest of the country follows?

Public Interest, Political Philosophy and the Study of Public Administration.

How the term arises in court.


Public Authority Decisions.


Public Interest Immunity.


The Public Interest Test –

Public interest law loosely, refers to legal practices undertaken to help poor or marginalized people, or to effect change in social policies in the public interest, on ‘not for profit’ terms (pro bono publico). In general terms it means a legal action initiated in the court of law for the protection of Public Interest.[1]

It is not a body of law or a legal field, matters lawyers work on. Rather, it denotes the clientele they represent. Instead of serving powerful economic interests, it stands for the advocacy of otherwise under-represented or vulnerable individuals, especially those living in poverty. It has grown to encompass a broader range of activities, typically the field of non-lawyers like civil rights, civil liberties, women’s rights, consumer rights, environmental protection, and so on.[2]Nevertheless, a common ethic for public-interest lawyers in a growing number of countries remains “fighting for the little guy”


recording a conversation without the knowledge of the people involved

What are the call recording laws in the UK?

The line between safety and privacy is becoming thinner and thinner as the UK government tries to keep the public safe in the wake of some of the atrocious things that have been happening. This has a knock on effect to regulation in things like businesses recording calls. The call recording laws in the UK are complicated and regulated by a number of different bodies. The main regulators for call recording in the UK are:

Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000

Telecommunications Regulations 2000

Data Protection Act 1998

Telecommunications Regulations 1999

Human Rights Act 1998

The Human Rights Act 1998 is an Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom which received Royal Assent on 9 November 1998, and mostly came into force on 2 October 2000. Its aim was to incorporate into UK law the rights contained in the European Convention on Human Rights.

Public Interest Cases

Public Interest, Political Philosophy and the Study of Public Administration

Public interest is a term with a long history in traditional political philosophy.  The idea of transforming the interests of many people into some notion of a common good is of course for many people the central task of the whole political process. Thomas Aquinas maintained the  “common good” (bonum commune) to be the end of government and law, while Aristotle took the idea of the “common interest” (to koinei sympheron)  as the foundation for his distinction between “right” constitutions, in the common interest, and “wrong” constitutions that were merely in the interests of the rulers.  The purpose of government is therefore, within many traditional accounts, to give expression to the public interest.  As John Locke puts it, “the peace, safety, and the public good of the people” are the ends of political society, and “the well being of the people shall be the supreme law”.  Jean-Jacques Rousseau took the idea of the “common good” (le bien commun) to be the object of the general will and purpose of government.

However, this begs the question of how one determines what is in the public interest and what is merely, in James Madison’s words the will of “interested factions”.  This is potentially dangerous territory.   Eamon De Valera, the founder of the Irish state,  famously is said to have stated that he only had to look into his own heart to know what the Irish people were thinking.  It is not difficult to conjure up a whole series of more sinister figures from history who similarly may have claimed to be the font and origin of what the people want.  However, the  fundamental task of a political process (at least in anything approaching a democratic condition) is to find a way of translating all the individual interests in society into some common, public or general good that both encapsulates and transcends each individual expression of interest.  Within some versions of democracy public interest is simply the result of the  clash of all private interests.  It may be enough here to simply count the preferences of people expressed in a fair election and take the majority position (hedged around by various protections for the minority) as establishing the public interest.  Other “thicker” forms of democracy require more by way of resolving, measuring and building preferences within process of deliberation and debate.

The fact remains however that no political system can generate a comprehensive series of answers as to what is within the public interest in all the issues that face government.  It will remain up to officials – as well as lawyers and judges – to make decisions about where the public interest lies in any matter.  The classic British Civil Service, within the Northcote-Trevelyan tradition, would see itself as operating within the political framework of government in pursuit of the public interest.

Certainly the idea of public interest is a central concept throughout  the Seven Principles of Public Life,  produced by Lord Nolan as guidance for all those involved in public service and it remains a key element for the everyday working of Government for example in the Code of Conduct for Board Members of Public Bodies. The concept of public interest remains central in other areas of civil service business  too, most obviously in relation to disclosing information.  In addition to important matters such as whistle-blowing, it can been seen too in relation to more mundane information matters such as, for example,  what  information  may be disclosed relating to the appointments process or whether Government funded research may be published more widely. Public interest is also used a working concept to judge  whether or not any new policy innovation under the so-called Green Book procedure for evaluating and appraising whether any new policy innovation should be developed.

This sort of reality of government practice has provided a starting point for many accounts of public interest within a framework of the study of Public Administration.  The way in which the term is used and the value attached to it have been the subject of many trends and fashions within this academic discipline in the UK and USA. Questions have been asked about what is the proper boundary for describing the “public” in this context.  Should it be the community, region, or nation, or is there a plausible idea of a European or even Global public whose interest can be divined?  [see EU lawthe ECHR]  Even within a viewpoint circumscribed by some vague notion of “society” – however that it is defined -, public interest has been seen variously as the commonly held values of society, society’s “best interests”,, a moral standard for public action, a simple balance of interests, an illusory idea, and other things besides.  This leads on to debate about whether and how any version of public interest can be calculated and how it might be advanced through government policy.  As the study of Public Administration blends into Political Philosophy there are arguments that an interest must be seen as “justified claim” rather than simply a want or desire, and that the “public”  as it is constituted for these purposes must satisfy certain democratic criteria.  This leads on to wider questions about the nature and possibilities of political action in a common  interest and the moral, ethical and normative nature of such action.

It is at this point, and because of the difficulties in ever coming up with any agreed, usable conception that some public administration scholars have recently turned to law (and to the Constitution in the US context) in order to gain some purchase on this concept.  Within (particularly North American) approaches to the discipline of Public Administration there can be seen a recent trend towards an approach that systematically studies public administration by looking at court interpretations, as well as statutes, international  treaties and significant constitutional actors.  Within this approach combining understandings of public interest with constitutional law, and wider ethical considerations as viewed through contemporary economic and legal analyses, is thought to reinvigorate the discipline and revive the viability of studying the rather troubled  idea of public interest.

Exclusive: more than 96% of reported fraud cases go unsolved Few of the crimes reported to Action Fraud are solved, Which? research found

Why do companies record calls in the first place?


There are many reasons that companies record calls and most of them are put in place just to make the business better. Training and monitoring are the main reasons calls are recorded in the UK. Not only is call monitoring a good way to help with an employees continued professional development but it is also a way to establish if the customer was right or not if there is a dispute. Listening back to a call is one of the main ways most companies that use telecommunications establish what policy or procedure to use going forward after a complaint has been raised by the customer. Many questions have been raised in recent years into whether call recording is ethical or not – but companies are bound by law to tell you that the call is being recorded, so as the customer it is your choice to continue the call or not. In most cases it can be beneficial to customers if they are adamant they are right or something was agreed to on the call that the company is denying. As part of the Data Protection Act 1998 all customers have the right to a recorded call of themselves.

What are the laws?
RIPA is the main regulation for the recording of calls. While larger companies adhere to policies and regulations that are internal, small companies and individuals are only bound to the regulations stated above.

Can anyone record calls?
As an individual you are able to record phone calls. There are currently no UK laws prohibiting actually recording the call – just what you do with the information when you have captured it. The only time call recording becomes illegal is if you hand over the information to a third party without the customer who has been recorded’s consent. You also need to be mindful of how secure the connection is if there is going to be sensitive information discussed.

Do I have to tell people they are being recorded?
Again, you do not need to inform people they are being recorded on a personal level if you do not wish to relay the information on to a third party.

What are the laws for businesses?
The laws for businesses are slightly different. They are only allowed to record calls in the following circumstances:

Evidence of a business transaction is being provided between customer and representative
The call recording is to ensure that a company is complying with certain regulations
The call is being recorded to ensure that a certain quality is being met
The prevention or detection of crime or to protect national security
To investigate the wrongful usage of telecommunications systems or to ensure the safe usage of them


Producing evidence in court

Can these recordings be used in court to prove critical facts about a claim or defence even though they may have been obtained without consent or in line with the rules?

A tricky question.  Again, on fundamental principles of law the claimant should not come to court with ‘dirty hands’ and judges commonly believe a cheat should never prosper.  The RIPA also prohibits the product of unlawful interceptions to be admissible in court.  However, in civil cases some judges take a pragmatic approach that if the information is already disclosed and it is highly relevant, then it will be admitted – but then you are stuck with it for better or worse. So where it is relevant and helpful it can be admitted and used to prove your case, but once the party is aware of its existence it must be disclosed and this may raise  other issues all together. There is also risk that although you may obtain judgement in your favour, the unlawful means of obtaining this evidence, could be reflected in the remedy you receive for example perhaps less damages.

Be warned that  if the data has been obtained illegally or unfairly then a party can address this by alternative means outside of the proceedings. It can issue a claim for breach of the Data Protection Act or under the above legislation claim damages for any losses suffered as a result of the recording.  The Employment Appeals Tribunal has also indicated that it would exercise its Part 32 powers to override statute and admit evidence if a fair trial was at stake – so even if precautions were taken by employers to prevent recordings, for issues such as discrimination claims it may still be permitted?

There is no clear answer in this area of law, but the basic principles of obtaining consent for recordings is one that everyone should follow the guidance and if you haven’t and want to rely on it, yes you probably can, but be aware of the risks involved.

Recorded Conversations: Can we use them in court?


A List of recording Apps





In July 2015 English comedian Michael McIntyre found himself the unexpected subject of a spying row.  The National Police Air Support unit (NPAS) spotted the foppish funnyman crossing the road, snapped his picture from the sky and then posted the image to Twitter, asking followers to guess who it was.  Silly move.  The  UK SURVEILLANCE LAWS  swiftly deleted the tweet after vocal criticism from privacy campaigners. However, they didn’t actually break any law. Human rights lawyer Simon McKay explained to the BBC how the police were technically on the right side of the law, but they may have breached a code of practice: “In a nutshell, the taking of the photograph is unlikely to be an invasion of privacy.

UK SURVEILLANCE LAWS & It Is not Ilegal to record public servants and business for personal use in the uk

However, its needless publication almost certainly is, assuming Michael McIntyre didn’t consent, which seems likely.  The Metropolitan Police is a data controller and this is personal data, so there are compliance issues.  On the face of it it also breaches the CCTV Code of Practice.  The courts have held the arbitrary publication of photographs by the police without a pressing need to do so is unlawful.  A Metropolitan Police spokesperson said in a statement that “this tweet does not, as far as we know, constitute a breach of data protection legislation.”  Which brings us neatly onto something we’ve been meaning to address for a while.
How do users of spy equipment stand when it comes to the law?  Well, there are two key things to remember when considering whether your actions are legal or illegal; firstly does the subject have a reasonable expectation of privacy and secondly, do they give their consent?  The latter typically supersedes the former.  You can’t have a reasonable expectation of privacy if you consent to working in an office where your conversations will be recorded, for example.
A reasonable expectation of privacy

The key measurement, should you need to defend yourself against accusations of illegal or unethical use of spy equipment, is that the subject had a reasonable expectation of privacy.  In short, that’s why it’s legal for you to bug your own office but not the bathroom.  There are exceptions to this.  For example, it’s legal for the police to bug your house.  You may have a reasonable expectation of privacy in your own home but if you’re suspected of criminal activity, the pursuit of justice and protection of the public takes precedence.  The concept of consent is very important too.  While most people may take issue with having their likeness or voice recorded and stored, they regularly imply consent to this without really considering the implications.   For example, the words “calls are recorded for training and quality purposes” are effectively soliciting implied consent.  If you stay on the line, you accept these conditions.

Relevant UK Legislation for Spy Equipment

The use of spy equipment falls under one or more of six separate pieces of UK legislation.  There is no specific law on privacy like the Privacy Act of 1974 in the States, but our right to privacy is covered mainly by the Human Rights Act.

The Data Protection Act governs how data handlers, for example the local council, police or bank, manage and protect your personal data.  If you are a data handler (hint: most employers are data handlers, otherwise how do they pay their employees?), you must comply with the Data Protection Act too, or face heavy fines or even imprisonment.  So, if for example, you legally record a conversation taking place during office hours at your business, and then post that online, you could potentially be in breach of the Data Protection Act.  The employee may have given consent to be recorded by signing their employment contract, but it’s unlikely they’ll have given their consent to having those conversations made public or shared.

The CCTV Code of Practice is potentially where the use of the police helicopter footage of Michael McIntyre slips up.  It’s not illegal to record him but it does breach this non-legislative code of conduct.  In order to operate certain pieces of equipment, for example closed circuit networks, one needs to sign up to specific codes of practice.

The 1998 Wireless Telegraphy Act covers the use of discreet or hidden recording devices.  Significantly, it’s an idiosyncratic piece of law that actually seems to protect the spy more than the subject.

The Lawful Business Practice Regulations Act covers the monitoring of employee behaviour, typically computer and telephone usage.  The relevant parts are in the main there to protect employee privacy and prevent them from being unduly snooped on. Public bodies, such as the police, HMRC or spy agencies are subject to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, which limits and controls their powers to record, monitor and gather information on members of the public.

Spy Cameras and the Law in the UK

Under UK law you are generally permitted to use spy cameras, under certain conditions.  Elements of the Data Protection Act and the Human Rights Act govern where you can and can’t conduct recording, but in general their use is legal.

Here are a number of key considerations for legally using spy cameras in the UK.
  • It is illegal to fit spy cameras to a business or residential property that you do not own or in which you don’t have legal occupancy.
  • It is legal to set up a camera in your own home or business.
  • It is illegal to use spy cameras in areas where subjects may have a reasonable expectation privacy.  The office is fine, the toilets or locker rooms are not.
  • You can fit and operate a CCTV system to the outside of your property, provided it doesn’t infringe on anyone else’s right to privacy.  For example, you may breach the Human Rights Act if your CCTV camera is pointing directly into a neighbour’s bedroom.
  • It is illegal to make sound recordings on CCTV networks.
  • All CCTV systems recording in public must be registered with the Information Commissioner’s Office.
  • All CCTV systems used in public must be accompanied by signs that alert members of the public that CCTV is in operation.
  • You must take reasonable steps to safeguard and protect any footage gathered via a public CCTV system.  Failure to do this, for example leaving a DVD of CCTV footage unattended or uploading footage to YouTube, could be a breach of the Data Protection Act.
  • You must not share footage from CCTV without express permission from those captured unless as part of as legitimate criminal investigation.
Phone Monitoring, Phone Tapping and the Law in the UK

The laws surrounding phone monitoring in the UK aren’t as cut and dried as those surrounding spy cameras.  The biggest grey area has to do with the definition of the word ‘legitimate.’  It varies according to who is doing the listening.  The police, spy agencies, intelligence services and even HM Revenue and Customs are considered legitimate users of phone tapping without notice, but they are subject to Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA) standards.  So if you’re suspected of not paying the right amount of tax, HMRC may legitimately tap your phone.  But they’ll need a warrant signed by the Home Secretary.  As a private citizen or business owner, you are also allowed to monitor phone calls, but under stricter conditions.

Here are the key things to remember if you’re planning on using call monitoring devices.
  • You can record any phone conversation you have with another person, without telling them, provided you don’t intend to share the information with a third party, even if that comes as part of a legitimate investigation by the police or legal proceedings.  That’s why phone call recordings made without consent are generally inadmissible as evidence.  If you obviously intend to share the content, for example by streaming it live to a third party or uploading it, you are breaking the law.

  • You can record conversations between your employees and customers or other employees provided implied consent is given.   Assuming both parties are aware that they are being recorded, transcripts and recordings may be used as evidence as part of a legitimate investigation or used by yourself for training, quality and monitoring purposes.  You may also just want to hear what your employees talk about on the phone.  Ethically and commercially this probably isn’t the best move, but there’s no law to stop you doing this, assuming you’ve got their consent.
  • It is illegal to record other people’s private phone calls (i.e. not work calls made on work phones).  No ifs or buts.  This is considered a breach of their reasonable expectation of privacy.  Note however, that listening to other people’s phone calls is not always a breach of that expectation.  For example, if someone is talking loudly on their phone, you can listen all you like and tell people what you heard.  You’ll get a reputation as a gossip of course, but the law will be on your side.
  • It is illegal to make the contents of a phone conversation between two parties available to a third party.  So if you’re legally listening in, you can’t invite all sundry to listen in with you.
  • Tapping – making the content of another person’s call available to someone not involved in their conversation – is illegal unless the contents of the call are required for a legitimate criminal or civil investigation.
  • It is not lawful to share information from a phone call you have been part of and recorded if the other person believed it was confidential.
  • It is legal to record someone without their permission if it is in the public interest to do so.  For example, if you are recording to gather evidence of criminal or corrupt behaviour, the crime you document is more serious than the civil offence you are potentially committing by recording.

Counter-Surveillance and The Law in the UK

If you have concerns that your computer use, phone calls, movements or other behaviour are being monitored, you’re entitled to put in place a series of counter-intelligence measures.  This is for your own safety, privacy and commercial protection.  As far as the law goes, problems only arise when your legitimate counter-intelligence activities begin to infringe on the privacy and other rights of people around you.  For example, hacking into someone else’s computer or otherwise unlawfully monitoring their computer usage to check if they’ve been spying on you is illegal.

Here are some key things to remember with regards to counter surveillance and the law in the UK.
  • Counter-surveillance is generally legal, so using bug detectors is fine.
  • As well as detecting surveillance, you may wish to prevent surveillance by using encrypted devices such as walkie-talkies and encrypted USB flash sticks.
  • It’s illegal to use mobile phone network jammers, wifi jammers and GSM jammers in the UK.  These disrupt other people’s ability to communicate.  Only the police and security services are legally allowed to use these devices.
  • It is also illegal, although ethically ambiguous, to knowingly use counter-surveillance measures against a government body.
GPS Car Trackers and the Law in the UK

There are a number of legitimate uses for using GPS car trackers in the UK.  The most typical uses for vehicle tracking are commercial, to ensure that employees are driving safely, efficiently and aren’t wasting company time and resources on unnecessary detours or diversions.  It is a business fact that employee productivity increases with the presence of management.  However, it’s not possible to be present in every car with every employee.  GPS trackers mitigate this business risk by enabling you and your colleagues to keep employees motivated by knowing their movements are being lawfully monitored.  A high proportion of road accidents involve people who drive for a living, so there are safety benefits to in-car tracking too.  It may even result in lower insurance premiums for your business, providing a tangible cost saving.

GPS workplace vehicle tracking is generally legal, provided you follow a few important steps.
  • You must obtain permission from any employee you intend to track.  This can be done by including a clause in their employment contract.
  • You must make reasonable efforts to protect and safeguard any data collected from your GPS vehicle tracking activity.  Failure to do this could result in you or your business breaching the Data Protection Act.  This is especially true of employees who use a company car for private as well as business use.
  • It may breach the Data Protection Act if employees who have dual use of a car are unable to disable tracking during their personal time.  It could be seen as a breach of privacy to provide an employee with a car in lieu of another benefit which is then used to track their movements during non-business hours.  There are also quite serious data protection implications concerning this.
  • If they regularly park the car at the same address over night, it’s fair to assume that this could be their home address.  The home address of an individual counts as “personal data” under the DPA as it can be used to personally identify them.  You must therefore treat this data with the same care and diligence as you would their bank details or medical history.
Domestic and private vehicle tracking

As with commercial vehicle tracking, domestic and private vehicle tracking is generally legal provided you don’t breach the Data Protection Act. In most cases, domestic vehicle tracking is conducted on family cars, or cars driven by sons or daughters, with all parties aware.  This can provide an insurance benefit and also builds trust between parents (often the people responsible for paying for the car insurance) and inexperienced young drivers.  Because GPS vehicle trackers may be deployed to track any vehicle (some trackers are magnetic to permit ease of fitting to the vehicle’s exterior), it’s extremely important that you pay close attention to the law.

Here’s a rundown of the key things to remember when using GPS vehicle trackers.
  • It is illegal to track anyone without their permission or knowledge.
  • It is illegal to share or make public any personal data collected via the GPS vehicle tracking device.
Computers and Computer Forensics and the Law in the UK

You may wish to monitor computer usage for a number of legitimate reasons, including fraud prevention, business and risk compliance or monitoring and protecting your children using a home computer from accessing inappropriate material.  Due to the potential for abuse, computer monitoring by members of the public is subject to the Data Protection Act.  The overarching principle governing computer monitoring and computer forensics centres around the concept of possession.  You are generally permitted to install whatever devices or software onto your own computer that you wish.  Persons then using your computer may be monitored, but if you intend to use the data that you gather, for example as part of investigation or civil case, you must first warn the person that their use of your computer may be being monitored.

While this does somewhat defeat the object if you are monitoring computer usage to identify criminal or unethical use, it is important to comply.  Not complying may put you in breach of the Data Protection Act.  Employers have special responsibilities under the Data Protection Act to get consent from their employees if they plan to monitor their usage.  Once consent is given, employers may monitor Internet usage, record keystrokes and store any data pertaining to the use of computers that they own.  However, the use of that data is subject to the Data Protection Act.

Here are the key things to remember for employers monitoring employee computer usage.
  • You must get consent from the employee.  This is typically done via the employee terms of employment.
  • You must not share or make public any personal data or personally identifying information gathered while monitoring employee computer usage.
  • You must take reasonable steps to ensure that data gathered during employee computer use monitoring is protected and safeguarded.
  • You must only use data and information gathered while monitoring employee computer use for legitimate reasons, for example including fraud prevention, protecting sensitive commercial information, preventing misconduct, unethical behaviour, or suspected criminal activity.
  • You must operate within the framework and guidelines of the Lawful Business Practice Regulations Act.
Here are the key things to remember on the legalities of domestic computer monitoring and forensics.
  • It is illegal to monitor usage of any computer apart from those owned by you.
  • It is illegal to hack into or otherwise access without permission any computer owned by another person.
  • It is legal to monitor computer usage of others using your computer.

  • It is illegal to share or make public any data gathered monitoring third party use of your computer unless you have warned said third party that their computer usage may be monitored.
  • It is illegal to share private or personal data of any individual using your computer, even if you warned them that you were monitoring their computer usage.  This goes against their reasonable expectation of privacy.  For example, if someone uses your computer and your monitoring software tracks their keystrokes and subsequently captures their bank login details, it is highly illegal for you to share or otherwise make use of this information.
  • It is legal to monitor the computer usage of any person under the age of 18 using a computer owned by you without their consent or permission.

The vast majority around the legalities of using spy equipment is common sense.  Don’t breach privacy, don’t put people’s personal information at risk and don’t spy on people who you have no legitimate reason to spy on.  However, the law is complex and seemingly legitimate actions can land you in legal trouble, so it’s smart to keep as up-to-date as possible.

The UK’s mass surveillance regime has broken the law (again)   


Public Law vs. Private Law: Definitions and Differences

Public Interest Vs Private Profits.

Judging the Public Interest: The Rule of Law vs. the Rule of Courts.

Recommended Posts

Leave a Comment

Start typing and press Enter to search