The Free Speech Union welcomes today’s landmark judgement from the Court of Appeal that the recording of non-crime hate incidents is an unlawful interference with freedom of expression. As the Court says, the knowledge that such matters are being recorded and stored in a police database is likely to have had a serious “chilling effect” on public debate.
So this addresses just police -- or otherwise agents of the state -- recording such incidents?
If so, solid ruling: not the government's business what you do within the bounds of the law.
As for private individuals recording such things, that's an odd duck. On its face, it shouldn't be at all limited (I think): anything you do in public -- or in private where you are aware that you're being recorded -- you're responsible for your actions.
But that's not the whole story.
What if someone records everyone who goes into a meeting on unionization in America, with the intent that participants will be identified to their employer? Yes, it would be illegal for the employer to fire anyone for participating in organizing a union at their place of work ... but that and a five dollar bill probably won't even get you an iced latte at your favorite coffee spot: the onus of proof in a wrongful firing case is on the fired individual. And good luck with that.
It also troubles me that while votes are secret in American elections, the fact that someone voted is public record. And you can legally (in most American states) face workplace retaliation for no more than the act of voting.