this post was submitted on 14 Apr 2025
109 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

9541 readers
1180 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

  2. Election Interference / Misinformation

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A pilot for recording conversation during Lyft rides is going on in some U.S. cities, but it's not supposed to be happening in Canada. A Toronto woman was sent the conversation between her and her friends during a ride, presumably accidentally.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] DScratch@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

They didn’t have the presumption of privacy from the driver. Driver was clearly visible to them, make himself known to them and was clearly within earshot.

They might have also agreed to being recorded in some slimy Terms and Conditions in the ride share app.

[–] couch1potato@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

If it's one party consent and the driver consented that should be it

[–] DScratch@sh.itjust.works 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

We get into the grey here, because the passengers probably didn’t include the driver as a participant. You have to be a participant for one-party to hold.

Also, if the conversation was recorded automatically, with no action from the driver, does that count as the driver recording the convo, or the company that controls the recording device?

[–] Dearche@lemmy.ca 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

But it's hard to argue that the driver isn't a participant considering that they'd be within touching distance and in no way blocked off from the conversation. Even without actually saying anything, the driver was a passive particapant, or at least it would be argued that way if it ever went to court.

Since only one side needs to give permission to record, and since that permission likely can be taken in the EULA, no matter how scummy it is, this most likely isn't illegal. It's like claiming that a a porch camera can't record a crime because the camera's owner wasn't a direct participant of the crime.

[–] DScratch@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 days ago

I ain’t no law-talking guy.

Someone could make the argument that because the driver was a hired professional they shouldn’t be party of the conversations of their clients or some such.

As I said, grey area.