Last reviewed: July 2026 · Applies to Audian Voice (call recording) and Camera & Physical Security services
The safe default, if you read nothing else: play an announcement at the start of every recorded call ("this call may be recorded for quality assurance"), and leave camera and doorbell microphones off. Do those two things and you are compliant in all 50 states without having to think about which rule applies. We can configure both for you.
Please read: this is general information to help you ask the right questions — not legal advice, and not a substitute for your own counsel. Recording laws change, courts reinterpret them, and several states have genuinely unsettled rules. Verify anything you intend to rely on. If recording is important to your business, have your attorney confirm the requirements for the states you operate in.
Recording a phone call or capturing audio on a camera is a legal act in most states, and the rules are not intuitive. Three things trip people up constantly:
| Rule | What it means |
|---|---|
| One-party consent | Only one person on the call needs to consent. If you are a participant, you can record — you consented. Most states. |
| All-party consent | Everyone must consent before recording. Sometimes called "two-party," but the requirement is everyone — which matters on conference calls and warm transfers. |
Consent in all-party states is normally established by a recorded announcement at the start of the call, before any audio is captured. The announcement should itself be recorded, so there is proof.
These 12 states require consent from everyone. If you record calls into or out of any of them, use the announcement.
| State | Statute | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| California | Penal Code §632 | All-party. Aggressively enforced; private right of action. |
| Connecticut | Gen. Stat. §52-570d | Split. All-party for phone calls; in-person is one-party under criminal law. |
| Delaware | Tit. 11 §2402 | All-party. |
| Florida | Stat. §934.03 | All-party. Private right of action. |
| Illinois | 720 ILCS 5/14-2 | All-party. Statute was rewritten after being struck down — treat as unsettled and confirm. |
| Maryland | Cts. & Jud. Proc. §10-402 | All-party. |
| Massachusetts | Gen. Laws ch. 272 §99 | All-party, and unusually strict — the statute targets secret recording, so notice matters even more. |
| Montana | Code §45-8-213 | All-party. |
| New Hampshire | Rev. Stat. §570-A:2 | All-party. |
| Oregon | ORS 165.540 | Split, and inverted vs. WA. One-party for phone calls; all participants must be informed for in-person conversations. See below. |
| Pennsylvania | 18 Pa. C.S. §5703 | All-party. |
| Washington | RCW 9.73.030 | All-party for both phone and in-person. See below. |
These do not follow a single rule, and the differences are counterintuitive.
| State | Phone calls | In-person conversations |
|---|---|---|
| Washington | All-party consent | All-party consent |
| Oregon | One-party — a participant may record | All participants must be specifically informed before recording begins |
| Nevada | All-party (per case law) | One-party |
| Connecticut | All-party | One-party (criminal statute) |
Washington vs. Oregon is the big one. If you operate on both sides of the Columbia, note that they are opposites for phone calls. Someone who learns the Oregon phone rule and applies it in Vancouver, Washington has a problem.
Oregon's in-person standard is "informed," not "consented." Once proper notice is given, a participant who objects can leave the conversation but does not get a veto. That is a different mechanism from Washington's consent requirement.
Michigan is worth a footnote. Its statute reads like all-party consent, but Michigan courts have long recognized a participant exception, so it is generally treated as one-party. Because that rests on case law rather than the statute's text, confirm before relying on it.
The remaining states and D.C. generally allow a participant to record without telling anyone else:
Alabama · Alaska · Arizona · Arkansas · Colorado · District of Columbia · Georgia · Hawaii · Idaho · Indiana · Iowa · Kansas · Kentucky · Louisiana · Maine · Michigan · Minnesota · Mississippi · Missouri · Nebraska · New Jersey · New Mexico · New York · North Carolina · North Dakota · Ohio · Oklahoma · Rhode Island · South Carolina · South Dakota · Tennessee · Texas · Utah · Vermont · Virginia · West Virginia · Wisconsin · Wyoming
Plus Nevada for in-person only, and Connecticut for in-person only (see the split-rule table).
One-party does not mean no rules. Federal law (18 U.S.C. §2511) sets the one-party floor nationally, but recording for an unlawful purpose is still illegal, and some states add wiretap, business, or notice requirements on top.
This is where most real exposure lives. If a call involves participants in different states, assume the strictest applicable rule governs. A Texas business recording an inbound call from a California customer should expect California's all-party rule to matter.
Practically: if you take calls from out of state — which is nearly everyone — use the announcement on all recorded calls. It is compliant everywhere and removes the analysis entirely.
These statutes govern conversations — meaning audio. Video is treated differently.
| Situation | Generally | What to do |
|---|---|---|
| Video only, no audio | Permitted in business and common areas | Post visible signage (best practice); never cover private areas |
| Video with audio | Triggers the consent rules above | Leave audio off. Signage alone is unlikely to establish valid consent for audio. |
Check your cameras. Many models ship with the microphone enabled by default. If audio matters to your compliance posture, confirm it is actually off rather than assuming.
Never place cameras where people reasonably expect privacy — restrooms, changing areas, locker rooms — regardless of signage or audio settings.
Consumer doorbell cameras (Ring, Nest, and similar) and video intercoms are where we see this go wrong most often: most ship with audio recording enabled by default, and none of them announce that they are recording. The video side is generally fine. The microphone is the problem.
There are two levels of risk, and the second is the serious one:
Why this matters more than it appears: under RCW 9.73.060, someone recorded unlawfully in Washington can sue for $100 per day of violation or $1,000, whichever is greater, plus attorney fees. A doorbell recording audio around the clock is a continuing violation, so the per-day figure is not hypothetical.
What to do:
These consumer devices are not part of the camera platforms Audian resells. If you deploy one yourself, its settings and its compliance are yours to manage — but we are glad to tell you what to check.
Recording is a feature we provide; the decision to use it lawfully is yours.
Because turning on recording creates legal obligations for your business, we need your request in writing — a support ticket or an email is fine — before we enable call recording or camera audio. We are glad to handle the technical setup, including configuring the announcement. The compliance decision stays with you.
Our old phone system recorded without an announcement. Can we do that?
We would strongly advise against it, and we configure the announcement by default. That a prior vendor did it differently is not a legal defense — and in all-party states an unlawfully obtained recording is typically inadmissible, so it may be useless for the purpose you wanted it for.
Everyone has a Ring doorbell. Is it really a problem?
Enforcement against homeowners is rare, and that is the honest answer. But rare enforcement is not the same as lawful, the civil damages provision is real, and a business or multi-tenant deployment is a different posture from a private residence — more people recorded, more of them strangers, and a company on the other end of the claim. Turning the microphone off costs nothing.
Do our own employees need to consent?
Employees are parties to the call, so yes in all-party states. Most businesses handle this with employee notice and a policy acknowledgment. That is an HR matter on your side, but easy to overlook.
Can we record just our side of the call?
No. These statutes cover the conversation, not one participant's audio. If the other party's words are captured, their consent is required where the rule applies.
What are the penalties?
They vary and can be serious. Washington: gross misdemeanor, up to 364 days and $5,000, plus civil damages of $100 per day or $1,000 (whichever is greater) and attorney fees under RCW 9.73.060. Oregon: Class A misdemeanor, up to 364 days and $6,250, plus civil liability. Several states including California and Florida allow private lawsuits with statutory damages.
How long are recordings kept?
Call recordings are permanently deleted after 60 days unless your Service Order elects customer-hosted storage. Voicemail is retained at least 90 days. You are responsible for downloading anything you want to keep.
State classifications above reflect our research as of July 2026 and are provided for general orientation only. Several states have split or unsettled rules, and laws change. Confirm with counsel before relying on any entry.