Well, not really. But it came to my department chair's attention that some students might have been using "smart pens" in class last semester; apparently, the new generation of smart pens is able to capture its user's writing (that can later be transferred to a computer and turned into a searchable document) as well as record what is being said in class. I thought this sounded far-fetched until I found a smart pen on Amazon.com, and it does indeed do all of the above, at least according to the product description. That is absolutely amazing.
The issue is that, while students are free to make copies of their notes and pass them around, recording other people without their consent is illegal in Pennsylvania. To use the technical jargon of this Wikipedia page on the telephone recording laws, Pennsylvania is one of twelve states that require all parties to consent to the recording for it to be legal; such states are called "two-party consent states" from the days where the wiretapping act focused on phone conversations, which only involved two parties. These states really should be called "all-party consent states" now. The other states and the District of Columbia are "one-party consent states", which means that people who are taking part to a conversation can record it without anyone else's knowledge. (There are some exceptions to those rules.)
The website of the Reporters' Committee for the Freedom of the Press has an insightful section about the legality of taping across the various states; the material is intended for journalists but contains useful information for other people too. A table summarizing the tape-recording laws is available here. The specific case of Pennsylvania is described here, although the webpage does mention the statute was set to expire in December 2008 and I am not sure if it was amended. It is likely that the Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act remains on the books in one form or another. In particular, "[i]t is a felony of the third degree to intentionally intercept, endeavor to intercept, or get any other person to intercept any wire, electronic, or oral communication without the consent of all the parties. 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. ยง 5703(1)."
This is an awful lot of trouble for students to get into, all that to tape a lecture. Therefore, we (the faculty members of my department) have been advised to write a sentence about audio recording in the syllabus and explain the situation, including proper procedures to get consent and make recordings, the first time the class meets. I guess my message will be: if hearing my exact words is so important for you to understand the material, just come to office hours and I will go over the lecture again. Asking for help is not that complicated - and, in contrast with the high-tech method, it is perfectly legal.
This is great stuff - wiretapping college professors!
Everybody should sue the hell out of each other.
Somebody's, if not everybody's, civil rights are surely being stomped on here.
Posted by: ironpigpen | August 26, 2009 at 10:48 AM