I assume in all these discussions, the key issue is where the person at the end doing the recording is geographically located? I can’t just fly down to California and call you up in your one-party state so that your recording breaks California law?
Has anyone ever been convicted and significantly punished for secretly recording a comversation/phonecall in which the other party committed an offense in it (eg making a threat, offering a bribe etc). ?
That is beautiful.
It seems to me that, if a company says, “this call may be recorded”, that they are consenting to it. This may be a somewhat novel interpretation.
So does that mean that Federal law only applies if you aren’t a party to the conversation and that some state laws apply even if you are?
… and have there been pushes to strengthen Federal law?
As I understand the Sterling/gold digger/clipper case, the recording was made face-to-face. However, there was a lot more to the conversation than has been released to the public. Sterling said what he said but I now wonder if he was being set up by the gold digger. It may be a case of stupid people playing stupid games.
Illegally recording phone conversations could/would involve federal and local law violations. That doesn’t seem to apply to this case. A private conversation would fall under local/state jurisdiction. It seems that Sterling and the gold digger may have had a deal that allowed her to record him for their own private use. Maybe. If Sterling can prove that he suffered some injury (financial, mental, or physical) because the recording was released, he can sue the gold digger. I’m pretty sure that the gold digger has lost her access to horny, stupid, rich guys so her future earnings might be limited to selling autographed copies of that spit shield she wears. (Remind me to check ebay for her “No Spit But Will Swallow” face wear. hehehe)
It’s not illegal to take pictures/video of people in a public area. It can be illegal to record their conversation. A gas station can legally record pictures of it’s customers but not their voice. You can record your personal conversations for your own personal use. If it’s used for anything else, you should expect to be sued (so you should limit your voice recordings to poor people. 
)
The point I’m trying to make is that some states require one party consent, other states require two party consent, and the OP was asking about the status of those laws. But Mr. Pellicano was convicted of zero party consent, basically. It just isn’t the same issue.
As I read 18 USC 2511, Federal law merely requires one person consent:
ISTR that recently some bullied kid recorded his aggressors and was threatened with violation of anti-wiretapping laws. Sorry I couldn’t be more vague.
Do you mean “Alzheimer’s disease” or are you just being cheeky?
You may be thinking of this.
Alzheimer’s disease is an official medical condition. Oldtymers disease is a ah, ummm, ah, well, it’s a, ahh, what time is dinner?
Gee, I sure do wish you had recorded that!
Regarding the national law: Yes, there’s a national law, and states may have more restrictive laws. Actually, they could also have less restrictive laws, but The Feds could prosecute under federal law regardless. Sorta like medical MJ in CA, or any MJ in CO or WA.
I lived in Ann Arbor, which had a $5 or $10 fine for smoking pot. They issued the equivalent of a traffic ticket, and you could mail in the fine. However, my parents, lawyers, made a point of letting us know that the local law didn’t keep anyone from being held subject to the state law.
And yes, it does matter whether it’s by telephone or in person, at least, in some states. There are specific laws for telephony that do not apply to conversations. Regarding conversations, I believe there’s an issue about “expectation of privacy” as well.
That’s fine… I was just asking related questions that fit the OP as I read it. He said nothing about Fed vs state.
… perhaps I shouldn’t have asked about calls for new Fed laws…whoops, there I go again…