Time to revisit the TS/Wiretap Act/Streaming rules?

As of May 2022 the U.S. code no longer restricts recording and rebroadcasting of electronic communications by a party who is part of the communication or one or more parties consent, much like the original law in 1968.

18 U.S. Code § 2511 Interception and disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications prohibited

(2)(c)It shall not be unlawful under this chapter for a person acting under color of law to intercept a wire, oral, or electronic communication, where such person is a party to the communication or one of the parties to the communication has given prior consent to such interception.

current through Public Law 117-129 as of September 24, 2022.
reference: (make sure you select Current at the top to get all the current changes)


As a point of additional discussion, if our Teamspeak were considered public (it is not) then this would also apply.
(g)It shall not be unlawful under this chapter or chapter 121 of this title for any person—
(i)to intercept or access an electronic communication made through an electronic communication system that is configured so that such electronic communication is readily accessible to the general public;

I bring all of this up to make it easier to share our experiences with the ArmA community in the hopes of attracting quality players to join our events.

Useful? Not needed? Too risky? Thoughts?

If this subject should be reserved for a less public forum nuke and pave and let me know :slight_smile:

Disclaimer: I am not a NAK Admin, Staff, lawyer, nor public streamer and my words are my own exclusively.

I wholeheartedly support this and was actually going to bring this up myself but then I saw your post about it. Maybe we could have a channel group for people who are livestreaming so people know that their voices will be broadcast? And maybe we restrict it to Nak Elite who are allowed to be in a channel other than the Altis Pilots channel, so they can stream from that channel

I mean… is it even necessary to make a channel? You already accept being recorded every time you connect to nak teamspeak.

I realize the intention was to allow for evidence based recordings… but it still applies :slight_smile:

Missed the post! Just saw it today after these comments. You will hear from this soon, thanks Sny

TEXN here,

How does the phrase, " . . . acting under color of law . . .", in 18 U.S. Code § 2511, affect the intereception and disclosure of TS communications? Inquiring minds want to know.


To explain, “Acting under color of law” means “acting in the interest of the governement,” IE acting as a law enforcement officer or a government official.

For someone who isn’t fluent in legalese:
18 USC § 2511 2(c) says that a law enforcement officer may record any conversation that they are privy to or that the parties have consented to being recorded,
18 USC § 2511 2(d) says that any person, even people who are not a law enforcement officer, may record any conversation that they are privy to or that the parties have consented to being recorded, UNLESS you are intending to use such recording to commit a crime.

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice.

Legal issues are not the only reason we don’t allow just anyone to record. We also need to know what their content is like. We need to know they aren’t excessively cursing, using racial slurs, insulting other players publicly, talking about politics, etc. There’s a certain degree of trust because we can’t directly control what they say in their content. We would need someone, or several people, to watch and report to us if they cross the line.

While I’m ignorant on the subject of laws and such, I do think sharing our good times with the ArmA community might be a healthy way of attracting quality players and so the way Michael just explained it all seems to me like the best approach to the issue granted it is properly implemented.


I would like to see this continue to be talked about moving forward if possible

It has!

Standby for an official statement…