Audio recording an IEP meeting in Illinois

[justalayman]

I dont think you are aware of the program. It does not record anything .. it transcribes what it hears to text ..
Dragon - NaturallySpeaking 11

since it does not perform an audio recording I think that this would be OK ... it certainly would not be anything that could be considered a transcript.

The definition of a digital audio recording device requires that it be “designed and marketed for the primary purpose of . . . making a digital audio copied recording for private use,” {FN35: 17 U.S.C. §1001(3)}

So the PC in this case would not be a digital audio recording device since it does not make an audio file.

This is just a first look at this.

I know all about it.

here is what Illinois says:

An eavesdropping device is defined as anything used to hear or record a conversation, even if the conversation is conducted in person

are you going to argue it is not being recorded?

 

[musicman654321]

(720 ILCS 5/14‑1) (from Ch. 38, par. 14‑1)
Sec. 14‑1. Definition.
(a) Eavesdropping device.
An eavesdropping device is any device capable of being used to hear or record oral conversation or intercept, retain, or transcribe electronic communications whether such conversation or electronic communication is conducted in person, by telephone, or by any other means; Provided, however, that this definition shall not include devices used for the restoration of the deaf or hard‑of‑hearing to normal or partial hearing.

Software is generally not considered a "device"... I did a westlaw search and could find no case similar to the circumstances discussed.

The questions of: is it a device & if it actually is used to "record oral conversation" (different law dictionary definitions of record include some that define it as an audio recording ~ statue would be vague in this sense).

May be a law that has not kept up with the times.

 

[Perky]

In the off chance that OP will come back, I recommend taking the recorder anyway and doing just as GaAtty suggests. Although Illinois is a 2-party state by statute, the courts have interpreted the statute to allow 1-party consent when the recording is used as a note-taking tool.

 

[justalayman]

=musicman654321;2820694](720 ILCS 5/14‑1) (from Ch. 38, par. 14‑1)
Sec. 14‑1. Definition.
(a) Eavesdropping device.
An eavesdropping device is any device capable of being used to hear or record oral conversation or intercept, retain, or transcribe electronic communications whether such conversation or electronic communication is conducted in person, by telephone, or by any other means; Provided, however, that this definition shall not include devices used for the restoration of the deaf or hard‑of‑hearing to normal or partial hearing.

Software is generally not considered a "device"... I did a westlaw search and could find no case similar to the circumstances discussed

.of course it isn't but the computer running the software is.

I think you also need to research what Nuance Dragon does do. If you think there isn't a file that is capable of producing a sound recording, you haven't studied the software enough.