If the article is accurate it sounds like their “reasonable expectation of privacy” focuses more on the individual than the location of the recording. Or maybe it’s different for “intimate acts”.
Which can be true in other countries too depending on the situation, where ownership of the location doesn’t always allow you to record anybody within without consent.
And how did that term become relevant, when fucking in the bedroom she shared with her husband?
From a surveillance perspective, he is clearly an intruder, and she is his accomplish. This judgement is bullshit, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it is overturned if he appeals it. But he probably won’t for $4,700.
If the article is accurate it sounds like their “reasonable expectation of privacy” focuses more on the individual than the location of the recording. Or maybe it’s different for “intimate acts”.
Which can be true in other countries too depending on the situation, where ownership of the location doesn’t always allow you to record anybody within without consent.
And how did that term become relevant, when fucking in the bedroom she shared with her husband?
From a surveillance perspective, he is clearly an intruder, and she is his accomplish. This judgement is bullshit, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it is overturned if he appeals it. But he probably won’t for $4,700.