Those so-called “eavesdropping” laws are misguided as hell. If it’s your conversation, recording it in any form isn’t eavesdropping. Absent a confidentiality agreement, you have a right to “rebroadcast” any conversation to which you are privy. These laws just take away a means of memorializing an otherwise voluntary conversation. I’d like to see these laws struck down.
I’m more interested in who the lawyers are representing ACORN are and how they are compensated(if it’s the normal split, or a flat fee)
The law itself says interception of electronic communications, so it makes no sense they are applying it to this case. That law makes sense, since you don't want people wiretapping or intercepting your computer communications. But twisting it to make this illegal makes no sense. The way they are twisting it makes all electronic surveillance illegal.
Oh, and the discovery process will be fun, fun, fun for the defendants' lawyers. I think the lawyers should request every document they can imagine from ACORN; not to mention depose every employee, from the janitor to the administrative personnel, and all the officers of ACORN's national team.
I think ACORN will rue the day they filed against these patriots.
Here’s a recap of the actual law: http://www.rightgrrl.com/tripp/woods.html
As I read it, if you are a party to the communication, consent is implied by both parties, but not by a third party, so you can tape yourself having a conversation, but a third party cannot.