This is, I believe, a felony in Massachusetts.

https://www.romanolaw.com/can-i-record-a-conversation-in-mas... (Linking to discussion, not the statute, because it confirms that it is in fact enforced.)

Come to think of it, this would also include smart glasses, etc. And whatever those LG devices were doing. Paging the AG...

▲ bonsai_spool an hour ago | parent [-]

> This is, I believe, a felony in Massachusetts.

I hear this a lot but such a perspective elides the novelty (and the actual question):

If I devise a mechanical device that semi-faithfully creates marks that convey information about a conversation - but which does not offer a way to replay the conversation whatsoever - does that constitute a recording subject to two-party consent?

If so, how does this relate to a potential decision to write notes about a call right after as a memo/in my diary?

If so, how does this relate to having my secretary record the conversation in shorthand while listening furtively to the conversation?

▲ jsw97 an hour ago | parent [-]

Not sure why my comment merited a downvote. In any case, quoting from Mass law:

https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartIV/TitleI/Cha...

    The term ''interception'' means to secretly hear, secretly record, 
    or aid another to secretly hear or secretly record the contents of
    any wire or oral communication through the use of any intercepting
    device by any person other than a person given prior authority by 
    all parties to such communication.

    The term ''contents'', when used with respect to any wire or
    oral communication, means any information concerning the identity
    of the parties to such communication or the existence, contents,
    substance, purport, or meaning of that communication.

If you get content, useful or otherwise, from the recording, you are violating the law. Unless you fall under one the exemptions, which you probably don't.

So first question, "devise a mechanical device" -- violates. Second, "write notes", no. Third question, "secretary record" -- no.

	▲	bonsai_spool 9 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Fair enough, it seems the watch would be an 'intercepting device' and thus all parties would need to agree for any party to use the device for the summary function.
	▲	PyWoody 7 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		`Not sure why my comment merited a downvote.` There seems to be a mass downvoting scheme on HN lately. I don't know who's behind it and what their motives are but I constantly see valid comments made within the last five minutes greyed out.