What is the legality behind hearing aids if we cannot digitally record audio without consent?
<p>From my understanding, hearing aids work the following way:</p>
<ol>
<li>a microphone picks up nearby sounds</li>
<li>a miniature computer stores the sound data in ram and processes the sound</li>
<li>the processed sound is then sent to the amplifier, then to the speaker, then to the ear</li>
</ol>
<p>However, I thought that the first 2 steps would be considered illegal in general, for e.g. digitally recording a conversation without consent of the other party.</p>
<p>So I was wondering how hearing aids became legal for everyday use. For example, is it that:</p>
<ol>
<li>hearing aids were added as a special exemption to the law? If so, what was the legal process/history behind getting this approved?</li>
<li>the way hearing aids process the sound makes it legal (like perhaps not storing any audio data to any disk)? If so, what are the exact details of this?</li>
<li>people with disability are allowed to digitally record audio without the other consent? So even though hearing aids are illegal, the people with difficult hearing can still use them?</li>
</ol>
<p>edit: I'm specifically asking about the U.S. in general, but am also curious about how laws outside of U.S. interpret this as well</p>

<p><a href="/questions/tagged/california" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;california&#39;" rel="tag">california</a></p>
<p>California penal code section 632, which prohibits electronic eavesdropping and recording, provides:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>(f) This section does not apply to the use of hearing aids and similar devices, by persons afflicted with impaired hearing, for the purpose of overcoming the impairment to permit the hearing of sounds ordinarily audible to the human ear.</p>
</blockquote>

<blockquote>
<p><strong>am also curious about how laws outside of U.S. interpret this as well</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>In the UK it is legal to make recordings for personal use.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>According to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA), recording conversations without consent in the UK is legal provided the recording is done for personal use; this includes telephone conversations.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>You just can't publish them or share them with others:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>However, problems can arise when such recorded conversations are shared with third parties without the consent of the participants of the conversation. It is an offence to sell recorded conversations to third parties or make such conversations public without the participant’s consent in the conversation.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Source: <a href="https://recordinglaw.com/recording-laws-uk/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://recordinglaw.com/recording-laws-uk/</a></p>

<p>RAM is what's known as &quot;volatile&quot; memory. It decays very quickly. When you keep data in memory, your computer is actually constantly copying the data back into memory to keep it from disappearing. So this is not putting the data in any permanent fixed medium.</p>
<p>An argument could probably also be made that the ADA (Americans with Disability Act) takes priority over any state law that impairs anyone in mitigating their disability without a compelling state interest.</p>

united-states recording