CFTC Takes A Page From NSA; Broker Recording

Turnkey Trading Partners ^ | 12/12/13 | James Bibbings

[h20skier66]

The obligation to tape record oral communications is imposed on all oral discussions whether they are conducted by telephone, voicemail, mobile device, or other digital/electronic media for a period of at least one year. Conversations must be captured and recorded by registrants whether they occur over company owned equipment or staff owned equipment (ie personal mobile phones, tablets, computers, etc.). These recordings are then also required to be cataloged, maintained, and archived in a form and manner that is both identifiable and searchable by transaction. In person, face to face meetings are excluded from the tape recording obligation.

[h20skier66]

More government oversight and data collection?

[Kevmo]

I think this is the trend for modern business. Every transaction to be recorded. It covers their butts. Notably, when you’re dealing with someone who doesn’t want the conversation recorded, it’s usually more because they’re dishonest than holding onto privacy concerns.

[babble-on]

I worked as a broker 25 years ago and every conversation was taped even then. To protect the firm as much as anything, so that clients could not allege they were promised things that they were not.

[a fool in paradise]

Bwahahaha.

Government agencies have been BUSTED using non-government accounts on free email sites to circumvent such data requests (think EPA, IRS, and other scandals).

What a crock of BULLSTALIN.

[a fool in paradise]

Don’t bother taping any Democrats. Even when you catch them on tape saying something, they will tell you it is “nuanced” and doesn’t matter.

[dirtymac]

I think your comments are absolute bull shit, tatamount to the people that believe govt spying is okay if you are not doing anything wrong. Big brother has cameras in your home watching everything that you are doing but if you aren't doing anything wrong well so what.

[Kevmo]

Instead of arguing against what is “tantamount to...”, why not argue the actual point that was raised? Basically, by loading up a straw man and arguing against it, you’ve invoked the classic fallacy of straw argumentation. So that makes your comments absolute bull shiite.

[h20skier66]

The bigger issue here is the cost of implementation. 1) cost for business to install systems for monitoring 2) cost of cataloging and storing records for a year on site then 5 years off site 3) cost of regulators to review monitoring and historical records. What appears to be simple isn't so simple when one takes a step back. This doesn't even consider the privacy implications; now government will have a record of every financial transaction made sortable by person and conversation.