iPhone finally supports call recording, but you may have to die before you can use it...

For many people, call recording is a very important function, and the fact that the iPhone does not support call recording is also a problem that has been complained about all year round. In the past, recording calls on iPhone often required indirect methods such as jailbreaking, external recording, and call transfer. At this year’s WWDC, Apple finally made a “historic breakthrough” and announced that it would add call recording to iOS 18. On July 27, with the release of the beta version of iOS 18.1, we also got to experience this long-awaited feature.

So, how is the call recording experience operated by Apple? What is the difference compared to the call recording that has long been standard in domestic mobile phones?

▍ iOS 18 phone recording experience

The "phone recording" function needs to be updated to the iOS 18.1 beta version to experience it. It supports Mandarin, English, Cantonese, Spanish, Portuguese and Japanese. Since iOS 18.1 has only released the first developer beta version at present, we do not recommend that you test it on the main iPhone, so as not to affect daily use and affect data migration when replacing a new phone in September (because the models on the market will be pre-installed by then. The 18.0 version will not be able to receive iCloud backups created in 18.1.)

When making (or receiving) calls in iOS 18.1, there is a new icon in the upper left corner area, which is the "Call Recording" function. Entrance. There will be a pop-up prompt upon first use stating that the recording will be stored in the Notes app and urging users to "respect the preferences of the person you are calling." Click "Continue", there will be a 3-second countdown, and then you will witness...

...witness the moment of "social death". As you may have seen online, iOS will start loudly announcing "This call will be recorded" during calls (the actual language used depends on the language set by Siri). This prompt is mandatory. Not only does it not support closing and not being controlled by the "Mute" button, it is also not affected by the other party's device. Even if the other party uses an older version of iOS or Andorid mobile phone, it can be heard.

After you start recording, a recording prompt will appear in the center of the screen, and you can stop recording at any time. After stopping recording, the system will start transcribing the audio into text. When completed, a notification will pop up. Clicking it will jump to the corresponding entry in the memo.

In the memo, you can listen back to the call at any time and view the synchronously scrolling text. The name of the caller will also be marked in the subtitles. You can also directly search and jump to specific keywords. After many tests, we believe that the quality of the transcription is still quite high, and there will only be some confusion in the scene where both parties compete for wheat.

Finally, it’s worth mentioning that the quality of the files recorded by iOS 18.1’s “Call Recording” is quite high. By default, it uses 44.1kHz, two-channel, 192kbps dynamic bit rate (peak at 256kbps), and AAC Encoder recording is probably the highest quality "call recording" function currently available.

▍ Different Android worlds inside and outside

Compared with iOS, call recording is more popular in the Android camp, but it reflects the obvious differences between domestic and foreign manufacturers.

On the one hand, although foreign manufacturers such as Google and Samsung have provided call recording earlier, they have imposed many artificial restrictions. Currently, the Android system only supports the pre-installed dialer to record calls. The version you download and install from the Play Store (the version number ends with .downloadable) does not support recording. Like iOS, the Google Dialer app cannot be used with the recorder at the same time. If you try to make or receive a call after turning on recording, the Android system will forcefully pause the recording and notify you that the call cannot be recorded. As for the previous method of recording in third-party applications through API, it has been blocked after an earlier Play Store policy update, and related applications have also been removed from the shelves.

Google also has strict restrictions on the available area for call recording, and performs it through SIM card area detection, which is difficult to bypass (earlier, although there were GAppsMod, GMS Flags and other applications that could be forcibly opened with root permissions, this method is currently have been blocked). Some features also have regional differences, such as automatically turning on recording for calls from unknown numbers or specific contacts only in India. In the list of available regions shown in the figure below, China, which has no formal business, cannot be expected to be included. Even the United States, the home of Google, is also excluded. It can be said that it is timid.

On the other hand, call recording can also be said to be an "infrastructure" in domestic customized systems. It is difficult to find any company that does not support recording. Its function is more customizable and flexible than foreign systems. Manufacturers are also "far ahead".

Taking ThePaper OS as an example, in addition to starting and stopping recording at any time through the recording button in the lower right corner of the call interface, you can also set up automatic recording for specified numbers, unfamiliar numbers, and yellow page numbers, and the recording will not start or end. Send any reminder and the resulting recording can be seen and exported directly in the file manager. If there are any shortcomings, the bit rate of 32kbps is a bit low, and the echo sounds very digital.

The call recording functions of other brands are similar, as shown in the following table:

	Recording prompt	Recording entry	Recording range	Recording quality
澎湃OS	No	Unlimited, with the help of third-party file management	All calls can be recorded, start and end time can be specified	32Kbps, mono mp 3
ColorOS	None	No upper limit, you can manually set the storage limit of 1000/2000/3000	All calls can be recorded, the start and end time can be specified	24K bps, mono mp3
Hongmeng OS	None	No upper limit, you can manually set the saving limit of 1000/2000/3000	All calls can be recorded, and the start and end time can be specified	148kbps, mono aac
OriginOS	None	No upper limit, native "Recorder" app management	All calls can be recorded, and the start and end time can be specified	64kbps , mono aac

In short, if you have a strong need for call recording, the most direct way is to get a domestic mobile phone.

▍ There are no restrictions on software, but there are legal restrictions

From a purely technical point of view, there is no threshold at all to provide the call recording function. The difference is nothing more than the detailed experience. So, why do international manufacturers appear to be "costy" in this regard, adding restrictions such as voice prompts even if they provide them, while domestic manufacturers are particularly generous?

An easy reason to think of is the restrictions of laws and regulations - is it because of the differences in regulations related to telephone recording at home and abroad? The answer is, yes... but not entirely. In fact, it is difficult to find a jurisdiction that completely prohibits call recording. The relevant obligations and responsibilities are mainly towards the recorder themselves, not the manufacturer (after all, there is nothing to prevent you from turning on the external speaker to find another device to record). Those software restrictions It's more like a way to avoid being seen as assisting in inappropriate behavior.

Take the United States, where major technology companies such as Apple and Google are located, as an example. Due to the system, the United States does not have nationwide regulations on telephone recording. Instead, there are regulations at both the federal and state levels. Each is different, but generally divided into two categories: "one party consents" and "all parties consent." Among them, "one party consents" means that as long as at least one party to the call agrees in advance, the recording is legal. For example, federal law states:

If a person intercepts a wire, oral, or electronic communication [which is defined to include recording], but that person is a party to the communication, or a party to the communication has previously consented to the interception , even if the person does not have statutory authority, the interception shall not constitute an offense under this chapter unless the interception of communications is for the purpose of committing any act that is a crime or tort under the Constitution or the laws of the United States and any state.

In other words, if you participate in the call, you can record it yourself (of course not for illegal purposes).

In addition to federal laws, the state laws of nearly forty states including New York are all “one party consent”. However, there are also laws in more than a dozen states, including California, that fall under the "consent of all parties" category, requiring the consent of all parties to the call before recording can take place.

This distinction complicates legal practice: if the call parties are from states with "one-party consent" and "all-party consent" rules, the prudent approach is obviously to follow the stricter "all-party consent" rule (California jurisprudence is clear required to do so).

From the perspective of a technology company, especially a large company with diverse user sources, you certainly have the motivation to take a conservative route when it comes to sensitive issues such as recording, so as to avoid unnecessary trouble. And just as no one in procurement will be fired for choosing IBM, no one in legal affairs will be fired for choosing the blocking function. Therefore, it is not surprising that American manufacturers are reluctant to provide call recording functions.

As for the mandatory reminder broadcast at the beginning of the call, it is also to try to make the recording behavior appear to be "consented". Although U.S. law does not clearly stipulate what constitutes "consent" to recording, some cases have shown that if the call party knows in advance that the call will be recorded, continuing to participate in the call may be regarded as implicit consent to the recording even without explicit consent. . Additionally, for phone company-initiated recordings, the FCC states that in addition to prior verbal or written consent, "verbal notice prior to recording" and "beep alerts that are repeated periodically during the call" are acceptable ways to express consent.

Let’s talk about domestic usage scenarios. Chinese law does not directly prohibit call recording, nor does it have regulations on the consent of the call parties similar to the United States, but this does not mean that you can record and use the recording casually. Before pressing the record button, you may want to have a few extra considerations.

First, respect the privacy of others. The "Civil Code" stipulates that "the privacy rights of others shall not be infringed upon by means of prying, intrusion, leakage, disclosure, etc."; among them, "Privacy is the peace of private life of a natural person and the private space, private activities, and private information that a natural person does not want others to know. ” (§ 1032). If you are on a call with an individual, the call is about a private matter or involves private information, and the context of the call generally creates a reasonable expectation of privacy, then casually recording and making the recording public may be an invasion of privacy. The other party may have the right to demand tort liability such as stopping the infringement, compensating losses, eliminating the impact, restoring reputation, etc. (§§ 179, 1165); the behavior may also be punished according to the Public Security Administration Punishment Act for spreading privacy (§ 42(6)) ;

The second is the evidentiary effect of the recording. Many people hope that the main scenario for recording is to preserve evidence when negotiating with businesses, employers and other entities, which raises the issue of whether recordings without consent can be used as evidence. In this regard, the country as a whole shows a trend of becoming more inclusive. In the past, according to a 1995 Supreme Court ruling, "it is illegal to record a conversation without the consent of the other party, and the recording material obtained by this method cannot be used as evidence." But this explanation was abolished in 2019.

According to the current judicial interpretation of the Civil Procedure Law, only "evidence formed or obtained by methods that seriously infringe upon the legitimate rights and interests of others, violate prohibitive provisions of the law, or seriously violate public order and good customs shall not be used as the basis for determining the facts of the case" (§ 106). This is a relatively loose limit. Many cases have shown that if the recording is to prove the basic facts of the case and the other party cannot prove that the recording process constitutes the above-mentioned illegal circumstances, the court will not treat the recording as illegal evidence simply because there is no consent.

For other specific examples, please refer to the "Understanding and Application of the Judicial Interpretation of Private Lending by the Supreme People's Court" published by the People's Court Press:

Whether evidence of secretly recorded and filmed photos should be classified as illegal evidence and excluded, it needs to be analyzed based on the specific situation. There are The following points need to be considered: (1) The nature of the case, the harmful consequences of secretly photographed and secretly recorded, and the degree of social harm. For example, the social harm of secretly photographing and recording in public places is generally less than the social harm of secretly photographing and recording in personal areas such as residences. (2) The purpose, motivation and degree of subjective fault of secretly filming and recording. For example, if a party intentionally posts secretly filmed photos and videos online, and then uses the online comments as evidence to support his factual claims, then the photos or videos and their comments cannot be used as the basis for finalizing the case. (3) Means and methods of secretly photographing and recording. For example, using bugs and telescopes to monitor someone's home around the clock.

In short, there is no one-size-fits-all standard for judging the rationality and legality of unilateral recording, but it will fluctuate depending on the content, object, purpose, and scene of the call. From this perspective, the design of the iPhone's recording function may not be in line with domestic habits, but it is indeed a method that will least leave controversy. To take a step back, even if there are no such restrictions on mobile phones, you should still have some restraints. Try to communicate first if you can communicate. Even if the situation is extraordinary, only use recordings in reasonable and legitimate scenarios and do not cross the line.

The above is the detailed content of iPhone finally supports call recording, but you may have to die before you can use it.... For more information, please follow other related articles on the PHP Chinese website!