@andybaio Gotta wonder how this works in multi-person...

@andybaio Gotta wonder how this works in multi-person consent states? Would a person recorded without their consent be able to take action against Limitless? Betting the user agreement indemnifies Limitless from the purchaser, but not sure how that would work for the person recorded.

Like 15 April at 19:20 | Wall-to-wall | Open on mastodon.social

3 comments

Och Menno !!

@karabaic @andybaio writing a Gdpr complaint every week ^^ just in case

15 April at 19:54 | Open on literatur.social

Steven

@karabaic Conceivably yes, the user could be liable for recording someone without consent in a multi-person consent state. But Limitless would likely be no more liable than Sony would be for making a tape recorder used to record someone without their consent in the same situation.

15 April at 20:37 | Open on c.im

jack the nonabrasive

@stg That makes sense for a generic recorder used in a place with no expectation of privacy with other uses, like recording music.

This is specifically designed to record human interactions and has a consent setting turned off by default.

Is there a colorable argument that the service provider knows the product has consent issues?

I'm thinking something like the product liability lawsuits against gun manufacturers who marketed guns for particular uses?

15 April at 22:20 | Open on mastodon.social