iPhone app for recording phone calls - incoming & outgoing?


Recommended Posts

Is there a decent app that does this? I've a funny feeling it'll break some silly law, but figured i'd ask anyway. I saw some app, but it required you to give the caller some sort of ID number. This is no good. Am looking for something you can set to record before you call, or something that auto-kicks in when you take a call. Had this feature on an old Nokia 6230i i think it was & it was handy at times.

That website is vague as hell. How the heck does it work and how does apple allow it?

Only Jail Broken devices... :) It creates tracks when you decide to "intercept" a call..

Not only that, it's a pay-for service.

Everyone loves a FREE app. Any free apps doing this anyone?

You did see it has a FREE 24 hour trial?

Only Jail Broken devices... :) It creates tracks when you decide to "intercept" a call..

You did see it has a FREE 24 hour trial?

Come on, 24h really?

He probably wants to use this a little longer than that and again: favors a free solution.

Can't blame him.

Glassed Silver:mac

Come on, 24h really?

He probably wants to use this a little longer than that and again: favors a free solution.

Can't blame him.

Glassed Silver:mac

Indeed.

If what i've been told is to be believed, then US laws have basically spoiled this for anyone outside the US, as Apple wont ok these types of apps, despite this not being illegal in some other countries.

These aren't illegal everywhere in the USA. It is by state. In my state, you can totally record someone without their knowledge so long as YOU are part of the conversation. You cannot, however, record other people's conversations that you play no role in.

  • Like 1

In the U.S.A., it is Illegal to record a person's phone call unless you notify him or her that their call is being recorded, and I think only Corporations are allowed to do so with their 1-800-xxx-xxxx Toll Free Number's and only for Quality and Training Purposes Only.

In the U.S.A., it is Illegal to record a person's phone call unless you notify him or her that their call is being recorded, and I think only Corporations are allowed to do so with their 1-800-xxx-xxxx Toll Free Number's and only for Quality and Training Purposes Only.

No, there is no federal law. Whether or not you need to notify is a state law thing. In my state it isn't required so long as you are involved in the conversation. It is, however, considered common courtesy everywhere.

My wife was able to record her ex-husband over the phone making threats to her and she presented it in court, for instance. She didn't need to let him know that she was recording him, because in my state that is legal. It didn't amount to much in court, however... they just kind of rolled their eyes and acted like it really wasn't that big of a deal. Whatever, he knows now that everything he says to us is recorded so he keeps his lips a lot tighter these days.

  • Like 1

These aren't illegal everywhere in the USA. It is by state. In my state, you can totally record someone without their knowledge so long as YOU are part of the conversation. You cannot, however, record other people's conversations that you play no role in.

No, there is no federal law. Whether or not you need to notify is a state law thing. In my state it isn't required so long as you are involved in the conversation. It is, however, considered common courtesy everywhere.

My wife was able to record her ex-husband over the phone making threats to her and she presented it in court, for instance. She didn't need to let him know that she was recording him, because in my state that is legal. It didn't amount to much in court, however... they just kind of rolled their eyes and acted like it really wasn't that big of a deal. Whatever, he knows now that everything he says to us is recorded so he keeps his lips a lot tighter these days.

It did not amount much in court because it is illegal to record someone over a cell phone without notifying them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_recording_laws#United_States

Wikipedia itself isn't too sure on this but no, you cannot do it.

It did not amount much in court because it is illegal to record someone over a cell phone without notifying them.

http://en.wikipedia....s#United_States

Wikipedia itself isn't too sure on this but no, you cannot do it.

Read what it says... Only 12 states require you to give them notice.

It did not amount much in court because it is illegal to record someone over a cell phone without notifying them.

http://en.wikipedia....s#United_States

Wikipedia itself isn't too sure on this but no, you cannot do it.

....

From the New Mexico State Code

N.M. Stat. Ann. ? 30-12-1: A criminal interference with communications occurs when anyone intercepts, records or discloses the contents of any message sent by telephone or telegraph without the consent of a sender or receiver. Illegal interceptions are misdemeanors. Illegal interceptions carry the potential for civil liability for the greater of actual damages, $100 per day of violation or $1,000, along with punitive damages, attorney fees and litigation costs. N.M. Stat. Ann. ? 30-12-11.

An intermediate appellate court has stated that in New Mexico, "one who voluntarily enters into a conversation with another takes the risk that the other person on the line may memorize, record or even transmit the conversation." New Mexico v. Arnold, 610 P.2d 1214 (N.M Ct. App. 1979), rev?d on other grounds, 610 P.2d 1210 (N.M. 1980).

Guys, can we stop the off topic legality discussion?

We're moving in circles and OP isn't even located in the US. And even if he were, it wouldn't matter because the topic is interesting nevertheless as the principle of recording a conversation is not illegal per s? seeing how with consent it is indeed legal.

It's getting dragging and distracts from the actual topic.

Glassed Silver:mac

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • NASA: This asteroid may not kill us but it probably won't be far off either by Sayan Sen Image by Zelch Csaba via Pexels New observations by NASA's James Webb Space Telescope have eliminated the last remaining impact threat posed by asteroid 2024 YR4, ruling out the possibility that the near-Earth object could strike the Moon in December 2032. NASA said observations collected by Webb on February 18 and 26, 2026, enabled scientists to refine the asteroid's orbit enough to "rule out a chance of lunar impact on Dec. 22, 2032." Instead, asteroid 2024 YR4 is now expected to pass the Moon at a distance of about 13,200 miles (21,200 km). The agency stressed that the update "reflects improved precision in our understanding of where the asteroid is expected to be in 2032 rather than a shift in its orbital path." The announcement closes a remarkable chapter in planetary defence that began in late 2024, when the approximately 60-metre-wide asteroid briefly became the most closely watched near-Earth object in the world. Discovered on December 27, 2024, by the ATLAS telescope in Chile, 2024 YR4 initially appeared to have a small chance of colliding with Earth on December 22, 2032. As astronomers gathered more observations, the impact probability briefly climbed to around 3%—the highest ever recorded for an asteroid of its size—before steadily falling as its orbit became better understood. By early 2025, international observations had ruled out any significant risk to Earth. However, astronomers were left with another possibility: a roughly 4% chance that the asteroid could instead strike the Moon. "The probability that asteroid 2024 YR4 will strike the Moon on 22 December 2032 is now approximately 4%," the European Space Agency (ESA) had said last year, noting that "there is a 96% chance that the asteroid will not impact the Moon." ESA said such an impact, while unlikely, would have presented an extraordinary scientific opportunity. "It is a very rare event for an asteroid this large to impact the Moon – and it is rarer still that we know about it in advance. The impact would likely be visible from Earth, and so scientists will be very excited by the prospect of observing and analysing it," said Richard Moissl, Head of ESA's Planetary Defence Office. "It would certainly leave a new crater on the surface. However, we wouldn't be able to accurately predict in advance how much material would be thrown into space, or whether any would reach Earth," he added. The asteroid also exposed an important blind spot in planetary defence. Because 2024 YR4 approached Earth from the direction of the Sun, it remained hidden from ground-based telescopes until after its closest approach. "We looked into how Neomir would have performed in this situation, and the simulations surprised even us," Moissl said. "Neomir would have detected asteroid 2024 YR4 about a month earlier than ground-based telescopes did. This would have given astronomers more time to study the asteroid's trajectory and allowed them to much sooner rule out any chance of Earth impact in 2032." He added, "As an infrared telescope, like Webb, Neomir would have also immediately given us a much better estimate for the asteroid's size, which is very important for assessing the significance of the hazard." The latest NASA observations underscore the value of space-based infrared telescopes in tracking faint asteroids. According to NASA, Webb made "among the faintest ever observations of an asteroid," extending the object's observational record by nearly eight months at a time when it had become too faint for other telescopes. That additional data allowed scientists to eliminate the remaining uncertainty surrounding its 2032 flyby. Although asteroid 2024 YR4 is now confirmed to pose no threat to either Earth or the Moon, scientists say its discovery remains one of the most significant real-world tests of the international planetary defence system, demonstrating how continued observations can rapidly transform an object once considered hazardous into one whose future path is known with high confidence. Source: NASA, ESA This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • Yup. Google is just scraping the entire internet for their own ad profits without sharing revenue with the sources. It's obviously stealing, but since these sites depend upon Google's search scraps to survive... As for me, I just stopped using Google for anything except Reddit searches. If Reddit's own search wasn't complete crapola, I'd never use Google search again.
    • I had a feeling this was coming. Picked up my first Mac ever last Saturday. Glad I did.
    • In a major surprise there is actually some good deals for the first time in years. At least for me.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      Admir earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      The_Focal_Point earned a badge
      First Post
    • Apprentice
      daryld went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Contributor
      Carltonbar went up a rank
      Contributor
    • One Month Later
      The_Focal_Point earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      419
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      170
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      130
    4. 4
      Xenon
      69
    5. 5
      neufuse
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!