This law underscores the concern that new devices and techniques for eavesdropping on private conversations are a threat to personal freedoms due to the invasion of privacy they could cause. The intention is to protect people's privacy rights while acknowledging that law enforcement agencies need to use these technologies to investigate crimes. However, the law does not aim to impose additional restrictions on law enforcement use of listening devices beyond what was already in place before this law was enacted.

This law makes it illegal for anyone to intentionally intercept or tap into phone lines or electronic communications without permission. If you do this, or help someone else do it, you could get fined up to $2,500 or face jail time of up to one year. If you're a repeat offender, fines go up to $10,000. However, official communication services and certain internal systems are exceptions to this rule. Illegally obtained information can't be used as evidence, except in cases related to violations of this law.

This California law makes it illegal to secretly record or listen to private conversations using electronic devices without getting consent from everyone involved. If caught, you can be fined up to $2,500 or face up to one year in jail, or both. If you've broken this law before, the fines and penalties are higher, up to $10,000. A 'confidential communication' is any conversation expected to remain private unless it's in a public place or event where one might expect to be overheard. Evidence from illegal recordings can't be used in court, except to prove you've broken this law. There are exceptions for public utilities and specific communication systems, and for those using hearing aids.

This law says that if someone illegally shares a private conversation with a healthcare provider, they can face serious penalties. If they spread this information over the internet or social media, they may be fined up to $2,500 per violation, face jail time, or both. Repeat offenders can be fined up to $10,000.

The term 'healthcare provider' covers a wide range, including doctors, nurses, clinics, and their staff. Certain exceptions exist if the communication is part of legal actions or emergencies, like if a law officer needs to intervene in a dangerous situation. Without these exceptions, sharing such information remains a punishable offense.

This law makes it illegal to intercept or help intercept phone calls between cell phones or between a cell phone and a landline without everyone's consent. If caught, a person can be fined up to $2,500 and face jail time, with harsher penalties for repeat offenders, including a fine up to $10,000. However, this rule doesn't apply to public utilities doing maintenance or operations, those using equipment as per tariffs, or communications within correctional facilities. Here, 'cellular radio telephone' refers to wireless phones approved by the FCC for cellular use.

This law makes it illegal for anyone to secretly listen to or capture calls made between cordless phones, a cordless phone and a landline, or a cordless phone and a cell phone, unless all parties agree to it. If caught doing this, a person could face a fine of up to $2,500 and/or up to a year in jail. Repeat offenders could face a fine up to $10,000 and similar jail time.

However, there are exceptions: public utilities can intercept communications if it's for building or maintaining their service. The law also doesn't apply to equipment used per utility tariffs or communication systems inside correctional facilities. Lastly, a cordless phone is defined as a specific type of phone with a base and a handset connected wirelessly.

This law makes it illegal to listen in on or record phone calls between two cellular phones, a cellular and landline phone, or any combination involving cordless phones, without everyone's consent. Breaking this rule can lead to fines up to $2,500 and possible jail time, with harsher penalties for repeat offenders. There are exceptions, like for phone companies doing maintenance or operations, or for communications within prisons. Important terms include 'cellular radio telephone' and 'cordless telephone,' which are defined based on specific technical criteria.

This law states that certain law enforcement officials, including the Attorney General, district attorneys, and police officers, can record or listen to communications as they could before January 1, 1968, without legal restriction. Additionally, any evidence they collected in this way prior to that date remains valid in court.

This law allows airport law enforcement officers to record phone calls made to publicly known law enforcement numbers at airports, provided that the caller is notified the conversation is being recorded through electronic tones. It ensures that such recordings are admissible as evidence in legal proceedings. The rule applies specifically to officers at airports with regular international flights and U.S. Customs facilities.

This law allows police officers at universities and colleges, who are certified under POST, to legally overhear or record communications they could have lawfully intercepted before 1968 during investigations of sexual assaults or related crimes. It also permits these officers to use body cameras without being restricted by certain other sections of the law. Importantly, this law does not interfere with existing rights like freedom of speech, assembly, or privacy rights.

This law says that city attorneys, or those acting under their instructions, can legally listen to or record communications if they are allowed to do so under the law. This also means that any evidence collected in this way is valid and can be used in court.

This law allows a person involved in a private conversation to record it if they believe it will capture evidence of serious crimes such as extortion, kidnapping, bribery, violent felonies like human trafficking, or domestic violence. Such recordings can be used as evidence in court for prosecuting these crimes.

This law allows victims of domestic violence to legally record communications from their abuser if they are seeking a restraining order. A judge can include permission to record such communications in the restraining order. This recording can be used in court as evidence if the victim believes it will support their case. Additionally, the Judicial Council must update their forms to include this provision.

This law allows certain police officers to use audio devices to listen to and record private conversations during emergencies like hostage or barricade situations. Officers can do this if they believe someone is in immediate danger, need to act quickly, and could normally get a legal order to eavesdrop. Only specially designated officers, chosen by a district attorney or the Attorney General, can authorize these actions. If eavesdropping happens, officers must apply for court approval within 48 hours. The conversations must be recorded properly to prevent tampering. Officers can enter without announcing themselves during these emergencies. A judge can only approve eavesdropping if a crime is happening or is about to happen, and all legal steps are followed. Once the emergency or a court denial occurs, eavesdropping must stop.

If someone trespasses on property to commit or try to commit certain illegal actions related to privacy laws, they can face a fine up to $2,500, a jail sentence of up to one year, or both.

If they've been convicted before for similar privacy violations, the fine can go up to $10,000, with the same jail time possibilities.

This law makes it illegal to make, sell, import, or use devices meant for eavesdropping on someone else's conversations or for intercepting cell phone or cordless phone communications. Doing so could result in a fine up to $2,500, jail time up to a year, or both. If someone has been caught and convicted before, the penalties increase, including fines up to $10,000.

There are exceptions to this rule. These exceptions include communication utilities that need to use these devices for their operations, law enforcement agencies, certain federal agencies, or individuals selling these devices to approved agencies or utilities. Also, if a communication utility provides a subscriber with such a device as part of their service, that's allowed under this section.

Under California Penal Code 636, it's illegal to secretly listen to or record conversations between someone in law enforcement custody and their attorney, religious adviser, or doctor. Doing so without everyone's permission is a felony if done electronically and a public offense if done by other means. Penalties include imprisonment, fines, or both. However, this law doesn't apply to public utility employees who overhear conversations while working on phone or telegraph systems.

This law makes it illegal for anyone not authorized by the sender to intercept communications from public safety radio services, like police radios, using a scanner or other methods. If the intercepted information is used to help commit a crime or avoid arrest, trial, or punishment, it is a misdemeanor offense. Informing a criminal suspect about intercepted communications with the intent for them to evade law enforcement is also illegal. This does not prevent prosecution under other related sections. 'Public safety radio service communication' refers to transmissions authorized by the FCC for public safety purposes.

If you share the contents of someone else's phone or telegraph message without their permission, and you're not a party to the conversation, you could be fined up to $5,000, jailed for up to a year, or both, unless a court orders you to do so legally.

If someone who's not affiliated with a telegraph or telephone office opens someone else's sealed telegraph or phone message without permission, or pretends to be someone else to receive such a message, intending to use, destroy, or keep it away from the rightful recipient, they can be punished under Section 637.

If someone breaks this law and causes you harm, you can sue them for either $5,000 for each violation or triple the actual damages you suffered, whichever is greater. Even if you haven't suffered actual harm, you can still take action to stop the violation and ask for damages. This law doesn't change any responsibilities under another set of laws dealing with civil privacy.

This law in California prohibits anyone from using systems that analyze or record voice prints or stress patterns to tell if someone is lying, unless that person agrees in writing beforehand. However, peace officers are exempt when doing their job. If someone breaks this law and another person is harmed as a result, the injured person can sue for damages or at least $1,000.

This law ensures that no government agency or its employees can force or ask a witness involved in a sex offense case with elements like force or threats to take a lie detector test before charges are filed. If someone’s rights under this law are violated, they can sue for at least $1,000 or the actual damages they suffered, whichever is more.

This law protects the privacy of cable and satellite TV subscribers in California. It prohibits companies from recording or sharing personal information about their subscribers without written consent. This includes household activities, viewing habits, medical information, and financial data. Companies can keep some data for billing and business needs but must safeguard it and allow subscribers to review and correct it if asked.

Companies can't give subscriber info to government agencies unless legally compelled to and must inform subscribers if such requests are made. They must also provide new customers with information about their privacy rights. Disclosed information should be anonymous where possible. Violating these rules can result in civil lawsuits or criminal penalties, including fines and imprisonment. These provisions are the minimum standards and local governments can enforce stricter rules if they wish.

This law says that if a business has access to someone's personal information, like their home address or work hours, for helping with carpooling or ridesharing programs, they can't share or use this information for anything else unless they get written permission from that person.

Carpooling and ridesharing programs can include things like forming carpools, vanpools, or developing flexible work hours. If someone breaks this rule, they could face up to a year in jail, a fine of up to $1,000, or both.

It's illegal in California for anyone to use an electronic tracking device to find out where a person is or how they're moving. However, this doesn't apply if the owner, lessor, or renter of a vehicle agrees to its use for that specific vehicle.

Law enforcement agencies are also exempt when they use these devices legally. An electronic tracking device is described as anything that attaches to a vehicle or movable object and tracks its location through electronic signals. Breaking this law is a misdemeanor.

If a business or professional entity breaks this rule and holds a license under certain state codes, their license can be revoked.

This law makes it a misdemeanor for businesses providing mailing lists or similar services to do certain things. They must verify the legitimacy of first-time buyers and avoid giving personal info about children to known sex offenders. It's also illegal to use a child's info to directly sell products to them without parental consent and to ignore parental requests to limit info access.

Additionally, someone who shares or receives info about a child, knowing it will be used for harm, is breaking the law. List brokers must honor parental requests to stop sharing a child's info or face misdemeanor charges. Businesses marketing to children must maintain lists of those who opted out of receiving marketing materials and must comply with these requests.

Exemptions apply to government agencies, specific educational and nonprofit entities. This section of the law defines key terms like "child," "parent," and "personal information."

This law makes it illegal to buy or sell phone calling records or lists without the subscriber's written consent. If someone tries to get this information through deceit or fraud, they can be fined up to $2,500 or face up to a year in jail, or both. Repeat offenders face higher penalties.

If such records are obtained illegally, they cannot be used as evidence in most legal proceedings, except to prosecute under this law or as otherwise allowed by law.

The law covers various technologies such as traditional, cordless, satellite, and internet-based phones. Exceptions include providing information for debt collection, provided it is not disclosed improperly.

Employers can be prosecuted if they knowingly allow violations. Law enforcement can still access records legally, and other laws remain applicable. The intent is to protect privacy and prevent unauthorized sharing of phone record information.

This section defines certain terms used in this chapter of the law. 'Wire communication' and 'electronic communication' are terms further explained in another section. A 'pen register' is described as a device that logs information like phone numbers dialed, but not the actual content of the communication. It's not used for billing or normal business accounting. A 'trap and trace device' is similar but is used to capture information identifying the source of a communication, again without capturing the content. A 'prohibited violation' is referenced from another section for its definition.

This law requires a court order to use devices that track communications, called pen registers or trap and trace devices, unless exceptions apply. These exceptions include service providers using such devices to maintain, test, or protect their services, or to prevent abuse or unauthorized use, with user consent. Violating this law can lead to fines or jail time. Additionally, acting in good faith based on a court order provides a defense against legal consequences.

This law in California allows peace officers to apply for a court order to use pen registers or trap and trace devices, which track phone call data but not the content. The application must show that the data is relevant to an ongoing investigation into specific crimes like felonies, stolen property, or child exploitation. The order permits device use for up to 60 days, with possible extensions if probable cause persists. The order is sealed to keep the investigation secret, and service providers must assist with minimal disruption, for which they are compensated. Several safeguards ensure the process is legally sound, including verification of the officer's statements under oath. The law restricts using these devices for certain types of investigations.

In urgent situations, a peace officer can orally ask a judge for permission to use special surveillance tools called a pen register or trap and trace device to gather information without a formal order. This is only allowed if there are valid reasons like a crime investigation emergency or a clear danger to someone's safety. After using these tools, the officer needs to formally submit written approval within two business days, or the use must stop once the needed information is collected or if the formal request is denied. Additionally, service providers who help with setting up these tools must be paid for their assistance by the law enforcement agency involved.

This law section outlines requirements for government entities when they obtain information through certain orders or emergency requests. They must notify the person whose information was obtained within 30 days after the order or request ends, detailing the investigation's nature. If there’s concern that notifying the person could negatively impact the investigation (an "adverse result"), they can request a court to delay notification for up to 90 days. This delay can be extended for up to 90 more days if necessary. Once the delay ends, the government must provide detailed information about the investigation and the data obtained.

If no target was identified when the information was sought, the government must report this to the Department of Justice, which will publish the information online, possibly redacting personal details.

This law allows people involved in a legal case to ask the court to disregard any electronic or wire information gathered illegally under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution or this section of the law. It outlines the process for doing this by referring to another code section.

The law also permits the Attorney General to file a lawsuit to ensure government entities follow these rules.

If someone's data is wrongly targeted by legal processes such as warrants that break the law, they or their service provider can request the court to cancel or change these orders, or to destroy any wrongly collected information.