Did Antonio Brown Illegally Record Phone Conversations?

In September 2019, Oakland Raiders wide receiver Antonio Brown posted a video to YouTube and Instagram of a phone conversation with his head coach Jon Gruden. The video was captioned THIS IS MY LIFE. AIN'T NO MORE GAMES and was described by Brown as a way to control my own narrative and put to rest all these false narratives antagonizing me. However, Brown may have broken the law by recording the conversation without Gruden's consent, as California law requires two-party consent for voice recordings. According to the producer of the video, Gruden did approve the use of the recording.

California law requires two-party consent for voice recordings

California is an all-party consent state, which means that everyone involved in the conversation must consent to the recording. In California, it is a criminal offense to use any device to record communications, whether they are wire, oral, or electronic, without the consent of everyone taking part in the conversation. This means that in California, you are not legally allowed to record a conversation you are taking part in unless all parties are in agreement.

The California Penal Code § 632 dictates that all four of these circumstances must be met in order to charge someone under California Law:

• Intent: California law aims to prevent private conversations from being secretly recorded. It is not illegal to record something in a public space and accidentally record a private conversation.
• Electronic Device: An electronic recording device must be used in order to be charged under penal code 632. These include microphones, telephones, laptops, and personal computers.
• Privacy: It must be a confidential conversation where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy. This allows for some wiggle room in the law as there is a large difference between an intimate restaurant and a public bench in terms of illegal recordings.
• Consent: On private property or in private settings, you may legally record if you gain the prior consent of all parties.

There are a few exceptions to the two-party consent law in California:

• Public Conversations: If the conversation is taking place in a public space where individuals do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy, it may be permissible to record without consent. However, it is important to exercise caution and ensure that no other laws or regulations are being violated in the process.
• Law Enforcement: Law enforcement agencies in California have specific guidelines and legal authority to conduct electronic surveillance, including wiretapping and recording conversations, as part of their investigations.
• Personal Safety: California law allows individuals to record conversations without consent if they reasonably believe that it is necessary to protect their personal safety or the safety of others.
• Protection of Rights and Evidence: Recording conversations without consent may also be permissible when it is done to protect one's rights or to gather evidence in certain circumstances, such as extortion, kidnapping, bribery, and felonies involving violence against the person.
• Journalism: Even with two-party consent, California recognizes that journalists may have certain privileges and protections when it comes to recording conversations in the course of their work. However, journalists still need to adhere to ethical standards and balance the public interest served against the potential intrusion into individuals' privacy.

In the case of Antonio Brown, who posted a video of an apparent phone call with his coach, Jon Gruden, it is unknown whether Gruden knew he was being taped. State wiretapping law in California requires two-party consent for private communications, including phone calls. If Gruden did not consent to the recording, Brown may have broken the law.

Antonio Brown's video producer claimed Jon Gruden approved the use of the recording

In September 2019, Oakland Raiders star Antonio Brown posted a video to his Instagram and YouTube accounts, which included a recorded conversation with head coach Jon Gruden. The video was captioned as proof that Brown was "free [ing] [him]self from the lies and becom [ing] [his] own person".

The video, titled "THIS IS MY LIFE. AIN'T NO MORE GAMES", was shared after Brown refuted reports that he confronted Raiders general manager, Mike Mayock, with threats of physical violence. In the video, Gruden can be heard asking Brown to "just play football", to which Brown responds, "I'm more than a football player, man. I'm a real person. It ain't about the football, I know I can do that, I show you guys that on the daily."

State wiretapping law in California, where Brown was based, requires two-party consent for private communications, including phone calls. It was initially unknown whether Gruden knew he was being recorded, but Alejandro Narciso, the man who produced the video, later told ESPN that Gruden gave permission for the call to be included. Brown had texted Gruden the video, to which Gruden replied, "Wow, I love it."

Narciso said he was "in awe" of Gruden's reaction, but the video soon led to controversy for Brown, who was fined, lost his guaranteed money, and demanded to be released from the Raiders. He signed with the New England Patriots soon after.

Gruden's consent would erase legal questions

California law requires two-party consent for voice recordings. In the absence of consent from all parties, the recording of a private conversation is a breach of state law and may also violate federal law. The law applies to all parties involved in the conversation, as well as the person at the beginning of the phone call who patched them in.

The producer of Antonio Brown's video, Alejandro Narciso, claimed that Gruden gave them the go-ahead to use the recording. If true, this would mean that Gruden consented to the recording and the publication of the conversation, and Brown would not face any legal consequences.

Narciso stated that Gruden responded to the video with "I love it! Loved it! I love it!". If these texts from Gruden are still available, this would provide evidence of his consent and would erase any legal questions regarding the recording.

However, it is worth noting that the perception of the video may still impact Brown's public image, and the Raiders and Gruden may still react negatively to the publication of the conversation, regardless of Gruden's consent.

11 states have two-party consent laws

In the US, the federal law on recording phone calls is 18 U.S. Code Section 2511, which prohibits the intentional interception of any wire, oral, or electronic communication. This is a one-party consent statute, meaning that a party to the conversation can record it without getting the consent of anyone else. However, this law does not apply when the communication is intercepted for criminal or tortious purposes.

While the federal law permits one-party consent, 11 states have two-party consent laws, which require everyone involved in the conversation to consent to the recording. These states are:

• California
• Delaware
• Florida
• Illinois
• Maryland
• Massachusetts
• Montana
• New Hampshire
• Pennsylvania
• Washington

In these states, it is illegal to record a conversation without the consent of all parties involved. This includes phone calls, electronic communications, and in-person conversations.

The consequences for violating these state laws can be severe, potentially resulting in years of imprisonment and civil damages. Therefore, it is essential to understand the consent laws in the relevant state before recording any conversation.

Violating state law can lead to severe penalties

In the United States, the laws regarding recording phone calls and conversations vary from state to state. While a majority of states require only one-party consent, a smaller group of states mandates all-party consent. This means that, in certain states, everyone involved in the conversation must consent to the recording, while in others, a party to the conversation can record it without obtaining consent from anyone else.

The penalties for violating state law can be severe and may include years in prison. For example, in California, which is an all-party consent state, the law prohibits the intentional recording of a confidential communication without the consent of all parties. A violation of this law can result in up to one year of imprisonment and a fine of up to $2,500 per violation.

Therefore, it is essential to understand the laws of the state in which the recording is taking place and to obtain consent from all parties involved if required. Failure to do so could result in significant legal consequences.

Additionally, if a phone call extends across state lines, it is advisable to comply with the most restrictive law to avoid potential liability.

Frequently asked questions