Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Caussa Capital (formerly Antares) T.CAU -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: john who wrote (4331)	8/13/1998 11:07:00 PM
From: Elizabeth Andrews	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4718

Do you mean that a Canadian court doesn't care if it's the tapee or the tapor as long as one knows?

To: john who wrote (4331)	8/14/1998 5:06:00 AM
From: Graystone	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4718

That is not true, is it ? or Taping in Canada As I understand it, anyone who wishes to may tape phone conversations. Anyone wishing to tape phone conversations must notify the other party to the conversation that they are being taped, and an audible tone must be generated every 15 seconds during the taping. These strictures may be avoided if you are a peace officer and you have a warrant. Wiretapping warrants are becoming increasingly difficult to obtain. Telephone conversations are afforded the same protections as all other private communications. Anyone who has a telephone answering machine that has the conversation taping feature, can confirm this. john, are you saying the courts have loosened up the law in this regard, what is the source of your information ? After reading the thread, I am going to call my lawyer to find out as suggested. <g>