• expired

Call Recorder PRO for Android $FREE for a Limited Time

143

-Runs in the background and records your calls
-Intuitive interface makes it easy to use
-Choose from recording all, only incoming, or only outgoing calls!

Related Stores

Google Play
Google Play
Marketplace
James's Awesome Apps
James's Awesome Apps

closed Comments

  • I don't know much about this kind of stuff, but wouldn't such a thing be illegal? ie. recording phone calls without letting the other person know?

    • -2

      Since when has it been illegal to records calls that come to ur OWN phone ?, besides many custom roms have them inbuilt…, EDIT: Removed +ve after reading tht there are a lot of problems to get it to work !

      • +4

        From memory its illegal to record any call without informing the person on the other end of the call, be it a call you made or one you received, hence why you are always warned when calling banks etc that this call will be recorded if you don't want it to be tell the person that answers it, by law they have to tell you.

        • I hear this brought up from time to time, and every time I hear conflicting reports from different people. Some people claim it's illegal without the permission of all parties involved in the conversation, others say it's legal as long as one party gives permission (i.e. you can record conversations that you personally are involved in), others say it's only a matter of whether it can be used as legal evidence in court (i.e. fine to record, but can't use in court unless all parties knew they were being recorded), others claim there are different laws for companies and individuals, others say the laws vary from state to state (specifically, that in Qld, you only need one-party consent).

          Is there anyone with a legal background who could clarify this for us?

          Edit: This seems to back-up the one-party consent law in Qld (although I'm not a lawyer, so I don't really have any idea what I'm talking about): http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/qld/consol_act/iopa197122…

          Edit 2: Also relevant

        • +2

          @mouth Could you elaborate on that?

        • +2

          why so worried? I think it is illegal to use but illegal in the sense of a court of law. Unless you always say things that can get you sued, plus you have the habit of showing all your dodgy recordings to somebody, who is going to find out?

          I think its intended use is for when people tell you information over the phone and you dont want to appear stupid and repeatedly ask them to repeat what they're saying.

        • +2

          Don't police always record conversations without telling you when they pull you over?

        • calling a bank is a secure institution u can't compare that to an everyday call, I will record anyone who calls me or who I call, Its my wish and defence, can u prove otherwise ?

        • +2

          Is that mean we need to mention this on our answering machine and voicemail since it will be recorded ?

  • Indeed, both parties must be aware of the recording of the call.

    • -8

      Wrong

      • +3

        He's right. By the Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979, both parties must be aware the call is being recorded. You do not have to participate in a recorded call. This is why when an organisation such as Telstra contacts you, they inform you, soon after greetings have been exchanged, that the call is being recorded. State laws also apply.

        • You are both wrong. If you are the caller or callee to a phone conversation, you are not intercepting the conversation, as you are either the source or the destination of the conversation and not intercepting it between these two points. The Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979 does not apply

          If you were intercepting the call, you would be listening in between these two points and the Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979 does apply.

        • I say you're all wrong in some shape or form lol.

  • +4

    In AUS, under the Telecommunications Act, you can legally record a conversation providing you are a known party (i.e. the callee or the caller) to that conversation. Thus, you cannot record a call if you are 'listening in' without both parties knowing.

    Most Org's will tell you because it's good practice, good marketing, good protection, and because with some/many you are ringing a 3rd party contracted company instead of the actual company and thus you don't explicitly know who the callee is.

    • Thanks :)

    • +1

      You might want to check the various State legislation.

      For example, subsection 5(1) of the Listening Devices Act 1984 (NSW) states:

      "A person shall not use, or cause to be used, a listening device:

              (a)  to record or listen to a private conversation to which the person is not a party, or
      
              (b)  to record a private conversation to which the person is a party."
      

      Sure there are exceptions, but that is the broad principle in NSW. Apparently the equivalent legislation in VIC does not contain this broad prohibition.

    • Very nicely worded..
      OP should include this in the OP. (with reference to this comment)

  • As others have said, the question of legality is murky and the only way anyone will know is if charges are brought and lawyers test the concept in a court. That would mean the other party somehow found out you recorded them or you used the recording and another party told the victim about it.
    Lots of things are illegal, technically. Like exceeding the speed limit, but we all do it. I don't have a need for this app right now, but if I did I would use it.
    I see it as more of a moral issue, and if you are fine with the concept, then go for it.

    • +3

      "the question of legality is murky" is the case only for those that don't investigate and read the law, instead making assumptions. In fact, the relevant laws are very clear and precise about what you can and cannot do when it comes to recording conversation, right down to the method used, what party of the conversation is performing the recording, and the medium used for the conversation.

      It has also been tested in the courts many times with precedents set.

  • there are so many Call Recorder Pro on Android Market.

    This one seems to have the worst rating amongst the others.

    • I agree. Not worth trying.

  • I did have this conversation with someone who insisted it was illegal, but they were talking about recording conversations not phone calls. I did find some info but it was just people posting on a forum who were declairing no legal qualifications. I am fine with all forms of reording if you are just using the information to prompt your memory or to avoid taking notes etc, which I do.

  • Thanks for the link. I have been looking for a good recorder, maybe this one is it.

    Note: I have read that many apps do not record the other party very well - ie it is barely audible.
    I understand this is a android issue - not an app issue. Will see what this one does.

    Recording speakerphone is an option, but not always practical, or clear either.

    Regarding legalities this was the link I looked at some time ago. Of course I'm no lawyer.
    http://www.privacy.gov.au/faq/individuals/q1

    It's suitably vague but the referenced document also supports the view that "as long as both parties are aware…" it's ok. i think theres a clear distinction between listening in, versus recording between consenting parties (I guess not hanging up is consent)

    It's quite amusing when a call centre / telemarketer says "your call may be recorded for training purposes" and you get to say - "You are also being recorded". The brief silence is gold.

    • yeah i don't like that limitation either.. even on my omnia windows mobile 6.5 i could record calls really easily.. both sides.. don't need to use the speakerphone

      will check this out

  • No it is definitely not illegal to record conversation . Unless someone can show me the law that said so I know it is not illegal . Come show it to me

  • -1

    I couldn't disagree with mouth more.

    The definition of "Interception of a communication" in the TIA is:

    For the purposes of this Act, but subject to this section, interception of a communication passing over a telecommunications system consists of listening to or recording, by any means, such a communication in its passage over that telecommunications system without the knowledge of the person making the communication.

    Obviously, listening to the other party when you yourself are a party to that phone call is simple - the other person knows you are listening. That is inherent in it being a phone call. The Act applies, but all parties have knowledge that whatever they say is being listened to. Where one party wishes to record the conversation (or just the other party's speech, if that were possible), he or she must make the other party aware of their intention to record the call.

    That's why companies do the coaching and quality assurance spiel: they (or their human representative) are a party to the phone call. They aren't intercepting it in the ordinary meaning of the word, but they are recording a communication, and therefore "intercepting" it under the TIA.
    See this for more information: http://commsalliance.com.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/2312…

    • Are you a lawyer?

      Simply reading that passage you quoted would tell you that there are many defined terms in there that require further interpretation.

      For example, the words 'passing over' have a specific meaning, given by section 5F. That section defines 'When a communication is passing over a telecommunications system'. Broadly speaking, a communication passes over a telecommunications system after it is sent until it becomes accessible to the intended recipient of the communication.

      Therefore I would say that on a plain English reading, your definition does not include the communication once it is accessible to the recipient, that is, the recipient can hear it. Of course this point of law may have been clarified by case law somewhere but I'm not in the mood to go research it.

      However having a quick read of the document that you have linked to, confirms this very fact on page 23:

      "10.3.2 It is critical to determine whether a communication is in its passage over a Telecommunications System for the purposes of this prohibition. Only in these circumstances will the TIA apply. In cases where a communications has ceased its passage over the Telecommunications System, State or Territory Listening Devices legislation may apply."

      It then elaborates further:

      "10.3.3 As a general principle, the Courts have drawn a distinction between the following situations:
      (a) listening to or recording using equipment which is electronically connected into or which intercepts signals transmitted by a Telecommunications System - TIA applies and State or Territory Listening Devices legislation does not. For this purpose, the Telecommunications System includes customer equipment attached to a Telecommunications Network; and
      (b) the communication is listened to or recorded by equipment external to the Telecommunications System (such as a tape recorder) after the sounds have ceased passing over a Telecommunications System – State or Territory Listening Devices legislation applies."

      Checking Appendix C of your document then provides a table summary of the legislation of each State, considering the case where you use an external device like a tape recorder to record the conversation. Interestingly, in the ACT, NSW, SA and TAS it is supposedly prohibited. But in the other States it is not. Take note that this document was published in 2004 and State legislation may have changed since then.

      For all you pseudo lawyers out there, the correct name of the appropriate Commonwealth legislation is the TELECOMMUNICATIONS (INTERCEPTION AND ACCESS) ACT 1979 (http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/taaa197941…) and not the 'Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979'.

      The operative provision is subsection 7(1) which states that:

      "(1) A person shall not:
      (a) intercept;
      (b) authorize, suffer or permit another person to intercept; or
      (c) do any act or thing that will enable him or her or another person to intercept;

      a communication passing over a telecommunications system."

      Edit: the case of organisations recording your call 'for training purposes' appears to be specifically dealt with under the legislation, but I can no longer be bothered reading. In any case, it is off-topic as this app is for person to person calling.

      • Here's a link from an Australian Government website:

        http://www.privacy.gov.au/faq/individuals/q1

        "The general rule is that the call may not be recorded. There are exceptions to these rules in very limited circumstances including where a warrant applies."

        That sounds pretty cut and dry, but then reading the links provided at this website it seems to indicate that different states have differing laws regarding the recording of phone calls and who needs to know about it (one or both parties). But generally- you ARE NOT allowed to.

        • Recording calls is too broad a concept. You need to distinguish between intercepting/monitoring and recording with an external device.

      • +1

        Yes, I am a lawyer, and of course the definition of "interception of a communication" contains other terms which require definition. I didn't want to write a treatise on the law here. I didn't address state laws, as others were talking about the Commonwealth legislation. State laws would not appear to apply in the case of this app anyway, as the communication when recorded by this app arguably would still be in the course of passing over a telecommunications system. If you were recording via tape or digital recorder with speakerphone on, then the Commonwealth Act would not apply, but state laws may.

        I am aware of the age of the document to which I linked, however, the changes in 2006 which led to the renaming of the Act to the TELECOMMUNICATIONS (INTERCEPTION AND ACCESS) ACT 1979 were mostly to do with access to stored information by law enforcement agencies.

        Hmm, 2 negative votes for stating what the law IS, rather than what I think the law SHOULD BE. Nice!

        • -1

          No shortage of idiots here on OzBargain, unfortunately, so you'll get negs for all sorts of sensible posts.

  • +3

    a bit off topic… but does anyone know of a similar app for an iOS device?

    • My thoughts exactly…

  • just repeating Greenlantern's question, does anyone know of a similar app for an iOS device?

    • iTunes would never allow it mate…. at least not in Australia.

      • that's the beauty of android, less limitations. But it sucks that they disabled 2 way call recording. I remember recording all the calls on my Nokia with a no beep patch and it was clear as gold.

        Before I knew about the beep patch, I just told people that my phone was running flat.

        I don't really want two way recording so I can record conversations, but so I can run my own answering machine without using the Carriers crappy voicemail interface.

        lol, why I'm here I may as well ask everybody. If I install a custom rom for 2 way recording. Is there an app that works as an answering machine/voicemail.

  • -1

    Wow such an incredibly simple question . Can I record my conversations that I have on my mobile phone ?
    Legalese is obviously created to create as much profit opportunity for the lawyer community as possible .
    The law is not an ass , It's just assholes that practice it .

    • In short it depends on where you are.

      Ignorance of the law and the legal profession that protects your rightsshows your narrow mindedness.

      • -1

        Ignorance of the law , yeah right . More like lawyers arrogance and self interest .

  • I have a ZTE V9 (Optus MyTab) with Android 2.2, and the phone function have a "Record" button. It records to the micro SD card.

    I assumed all Android phones have that, if so this only offers a minor enhancement over that (in that you can nominate automatic recording of calls).

  • A Current Affair and Today Tonight do it all the time.

  • Installed on my Samsung Galaxy S2 … doesn't work.
    Don't install if you have a SGS2

    • Useless piece of software, doesnt work on any of the 5 androids I have.

  • -1

    This seems to be a rip Off of Call Recorder PRO by Blue Tornado
    Which does seem to work on manay more devices including the SGS2 (I just tried the LITE version)

    Not sure why it has got so many positive votes here.

    • +1

      This seems to be a rip Off of Call Recorder PRO by Blue Tornado

      Er, this is Call Recorder PRO by Blue Tornado.

      • Oops! I copy/pasted the wrong one

        Original seems to be Call Recorder PRO by ERA Ltda
        This is a paid app.

        There is a LITE version so you can check if it works with your phone.

  • -2

    So are you guys saying it is illegal for me to record a telephone conversation in my head? Get real. The media I use to do the recording is not specified in any of the above examples or quotes. So if you are saying it is illegal to record a conversation, whatever the type, then you are then not permitted to record it in your own memory.

  • Total garbage. Installed on my galaxy s and ALL calls I made my voice was blocked. The other end can hear me but I can't hear them, at first I blamed it on the others.
    I just realized it now this app that doesn't record calls or let you speak for that matter. No wonder it was for free. I uninstalled and all went ok.

    • tested on LG 2x with CM7

      nothing.

Login or Join to leave a comment