Massachusetts Wiretap Act (M.G.L. c. 272 s. 99)
Law. Placed at Massachusetts. Read 30 Sep 2026; 4 provisions cited by the planner.
What does M.G.L. c. 272 s. 99 99 require?
A person must not wilfully intercept, attempt to intercept, or procure another to intercept a wire communication, that is, secretly hear or record a telephone or other wire call with an intercepting device without prior authority from all parties. Also cited: C.1, in-person speech: do not secretly record or listen with a device without the prior authority of all parties; B.3 and D.1.b, business equipment: rely only on tariffed telephone equipment or an office intercom used in the ordinary course of business.
M.G.L. c. 272 s. 99 C.1Phone calls: do not secretly hear or record without the prior authority of all parties A person must not wilfully intercept, attempt to intercept, or procure another to intercept a wire communication, that is, secretly hear or record a telephone or other wire call with an intercepting device without prior authority from all parties. Penalty: a fine of up to 10,000 dollars, up to five years in state prison or two and a half years in a house of correction, or both. Installing a device in circumstances showing intent to intercept is prima facie evidence of a violation.
M.G.L. c. 272 s. 99 C.1In-person speech: do not secretly record or listen with a device without the prior authority of all parties A person must not wilfully secretly hear or secretly record another's spoken words with an intercepting device without prior authority from all parties. Because oral communication covers any speech not broadcast by radio, the protection does not depend on showing an expectation of privacy; what makes the recording unlawful is that it is secret. Open recording that the speakers know about is not an interception. For an employer this covers hidden microphones, audio-enabled CCTV without notice, and covert recording of interviews and meetings.
M.G.L. c. 272 s. 99 B.3 and D.1.bBusiness equipment: rely only on tariffed telephone equipment or an office intercom used in the ordinary course of business Telephone equipment furnished by a common carrier under its tariff and used by the subscriber in the ordinary course of its business is not an intercepting device (B.3), and possessing or using an office intercommunication system in the ordinary course of business is not a violation (D.1.b). A business relying on either must keep the use within the ordinary course of its business; other recorders and software, or listening outside a business purpose, need the prior authority of all parties.
M.G.L. c. 272 s. 99 C.3Do not disclose or use the contents of an intercepted communication A person must not wilfully disclose, or attempt to disclose, to anyone the contents of a wire or oral communication, or use or attempt to use those contents, knowing the information was obtained through interception. Penalty: up to two years in a house of correction, a fine of up to 5,000 dollars, or both.