California Recording, Tracking & Surveillance Laws

At a glance

Adult subject — e.g., a spouse

Your own minor child

As a parent you generally have broad authority to monitor your own minor child — especially on a phone, computer, or vehicle you own or provide. The gray area is recording the child's conversations with other people, where wiretap law and the “vicarious consent” doctrine come in and outcomes vary — and if you're co-parenting, custody orders and the other parent's rights matter. Those are marked “seek legal advice.”

General (any subject)

Recording & consent

California is an all-party consent state. Under Penal Code § 632, you may not use a device to record a confidential communication — in person or by phone — without the consent of every party, even if you're one of them. Section 632.7 extends all-party consent to any call involving a cell or cordless phone, whether or not it's “confidential” (Smith v. LoanMe, Inc., Cal. 2021).

Criminal penalties reach $2,500 per violation and up to a year in jail. Separately, § 637.2 lets the recorded person sue for $5,000 per violation or three times actual damages, whichever is greater — no proof of financial harm required. And under § 632(d), a recording made in violation of the law is inadmissible as evidence. Bottom line: secretly recording a spouse's call or a private conversation in California is generally illegal, useless in court, and can turn you into the defendant. Conversations with no reasonable expectation of privacy (e.g., a loud public exchange) can be treated differently.

Recording law enforcement

California expressly protects the right to record police. Under Penal Code § 148(g) (the California Right to Record Act, 2016), photographing or recording an officer performing their duties in a public place, or anywhere you have a legal right to be, is not a crime — it doesn't count as resisting or obstructing, and it can't be the sole basis to detain, search, or arrest you. The one limit: you can't physically interfere with what the officers are doing. And the all-party audio rule (§ 632) generally doesn't apply to on-duty police in public, where there's no reasonable expectation of privacy.

GPS & vehicle tracking

Penal Code § 637.7 makes it a misdemeanor to use an electronic tracking device to determine the location or movement of a person or vehicle — unless the registered owner, lessor, or lessee of the vehicle has consented. The practical trap in domestic cases: if the car is registered to your spouse, placing a tracker on it without their consent violates § 637.7, and community property does not automatically make it lawful. Tracking is generally safe only on a vehicle you own (or with the owner's consent). Law enforcement has a separate exception.

Private-investigator licensing

California requires a state license to work as a private investigator for hire, issued by the Bureau of Security and Investigative Services (BSIS) under the Department of Consumer Affairs (Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 7520–7539). Licensure requires roughly 6,000 hours of compensated investigative experience (reduced with a qualifying degree) plus an exam and background check. Acting as a PI without a license is an infraction carrying a $1,000 fine. You can verify any California licensee — number, status, and disciplinary history — through the state license lookup.

Out-of-state investigators (reciprocity)

California has limited reciprocity with five states — Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, North Carolina, and Oregon. A currently-licensed PI from one of those may continue an investigation into California only if it originated in their home state, for up to 60 days per case, and only after filing BSIS's Out-of-State PI Notification Form and getting approval. Investigators from every other state must hold a California license to work here.

Hidden cameras, video & privacy

Audio recording is governed by § 632 above; secret video in private places is governed by Penal Code § 647(j). It's a crime to use a concealed camera to record someone under or through their clothing (§ 647(j)(2)), or to record an identifiable person in a state of undress in any room where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy — bathrooms, bedrooms, changing rooms (§ 647(j)(3)). A first offense is a misdemeanor (up to $1,000 and six months), rising for repeat or minor-victim cases. The same civil remedy under § 637.2 ($5,000 or 3× damages) applies, and Civil Code § 1708.8 addresses invasive photography including drones.

Cameras inside your own home (nanny cams)

In your own home you may generally place video cameras in common areas — a living room, kitchen, entryway — because no one there has a reasonable expectation of privacy. You may not record where they do: a bathroom, a bedroom, or a live-in caregiver's private room (Penal Code § 647(j)). The bigger trap is audio: California is all-party consent, so a nanny cam that records sound can violate § 632 by capturing the caregiver's conversations without consent. The safest setup is video-only in shared spaces.

Doorbell & outdoor cameras (neighbors)

A doorbell or outdoor camera that captures the street, sidewalk, or areas in plain public view is generally fine — there's no expectation of privacy in public. Two things create liability: aiming into a neighbor's private space (their windows, a fenced yard), which can be invasion of privacy or nuisance (Civil Code § 1708.8), and the camera's audio, since recording conversations at your door can trigger all-party consent under § 632. Keep cameras pointed at your own property and public approaches, and be cautious with sound.

Workplace & employee recording

The all-party rule applies at work too: an employer generally can't secretly record employees' confidential conversations without everyone's consent (Penal Code §§ 631, 632). Labor Code § 435 flatly bans audio or video recording of employees in restrooms, locker rooms, or changing rooms — an infraction, and such recordings can't be used for any purpose. Employers who monitor email, computers, or general work areas are expected to give written notice of what's monitored and why. Video in ordinary work areas for a legitimate purpose is generally allowed; private areas are not.

Drone surveillance

California's privacy statute, Civil Code § 1708.8 (expanded to cover drones in 2015), makes it a civil wrong to knowingly enter the airspace above someone's property to capture images or recordings of them in a private, personal, or familial activity in a way offensive to a reasonable person — even if the drone never crosses the property line. Damages can reach a $50,000 civil penalty per violation plus treble and punitive damages. It doesn't ban all flight over private land; it targets image capture of people with a reasonable expectation of privacy. Drone operation itself — airspace and registration — is governed separately by the FAA.

See an error or an out-of-date citation? Please let us know.

General legal information only, not legal advice, and no attorney-client relationship is created by reading it. Statutes and their interpretation change; entries may be incomplete or outdated. We disclaim all warranties and any liability for reliance on this page. Confirm the current law at the official California Codes and consult a licensed California attorney before recording, tracking, installing cameras, or gathering evidence.