SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 15 submissions in the queue.
SoylentNews
TheMukt reports:
Over the last few days we have seen increased activity on the nightly changelogs which suggest [CyanogenMod has] incorporated a call recording feature into its most recent nightlies. Generally speaking call recording is largely considered very grey in terms of the law and as such it seems CM is not offering this feature as a direct and obvious feature.
Instead what we are seeing is the call recording setting can be activated by the user but does require a little bit of knowledge. This presumably is a way for CM to avoid any direct law breaking. So to be accurate CM [is] now offering support for call recording although not the feature directly.
Related: Record Customer Service Calls
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Call Recording Feature Available On CyanogenMod Nightlies
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 31 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
* m2 stares at the monitor... it looks like a hamburger...
m2 - that's a bad sign
(Score: 4, Insightful) by MrNemesis on Wednesday August 27 2014, @04:38AM
Really?! I'm quote surprised to learn it isn't a standard feature TBH; my last two phones, the appallingly stone-aged Nokia 6310i and Nokia E6, both have it built in.
What's the controversy supposed to be about? Reading this wiki page [wikipedia.org] makes it sound like it's not a big deal in the US either. So why the cloak and dagger and why's it taken so long to implement?! I've considered it a crucial piece of tech for over a decade.
"To paraphrase Nietzsche, I have looked into the abyss and been sick in it."
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 27 2014, @06:05AM
I think business is terrified that call recording among the customers will take off.
However, I believe business has done a great job of conditioning us all that recording calls is a perfectly businesslike thing to do.. you know "this call is recorded for quality assurance purposes.."
I believe the fear business has for recorded calls is the inability to precede any reply with a torrent of fine greyed-out print like they do when printed information is released.
Business has lobbied for the legality of making oral commitments legally binding when recorded. I have no beef with that - but what is good for the goose should be good for the gander too. If the telemarketer calls with a business offer, then the person called should have a record of what service and price was agreed on before all the "businesstalk" is spoken. ( A good example of businesstalk is an AT&T contract - full of payment obligations to the company as well as all sorts of hold harmless for failure to deliver what was in the large print. ) Its best to avoid businesses that talk that way at all costs.
When a business has to clearly sound out all the disclaimers that are usually hidden in fine greyed out font, the customer will have ample time to determine whether or not they want to accept those terms and may think better of it than do business with companies who need the protection of all that legalese before they will do anything.
Incidentally, the first thing I do when considering a purchase with a company is look for the fine print. Presenting me a contract with a lot of fine print on it - well you might as well wipe your ass on it before handing it to me. My mood goes from happy to pissed-off in milliseconds when I see the company I was thinking of doing business with has to hide behind all sorts of legal trickery to stay in business. Fine grey print says to me this company relies on legal maneuvering, not customer satisfaction, for their business model, and its best to stay clear of them. They aren't much different than a street huckster trying to interest me in his shell game. You will lead a much happier life if you do not sign anything they hand you.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by VLM on Wednesday August 27 2014, @11:12AM
"So why the cloak and dagger"
Corporate FUD, thats what. They are tired of bad service ending up all over the internet and paying for better service might cut into the multimillion dollar exec bonuses. So FUD FUD FUD about it.
In my state its perfectly legal as long as I know about it, so I'm all good.