Short answer: Section 934.03(2)(d) of the Florida Statutes covers a wire, oral, or electronic communication. It says interception is lawful when all of the parties have given prior consent. The federal statute, 18 U.S.C. 2511(2)(d), is written for a person not acting under color of law. It says interception by that person is not unlawful where the person is a party or one of the parties has given prior consent. The federal statute makes an exception when the purpose is a criminal or tortious act in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States or of any State. Section 934.10 gives a civil cause of action to a person whose communication is intercepted in violation of sections 934.03 to 934.09. That is what the pages said on November 13, 2026.
Before you read: This guide is based on sections 934.02, 934.03 and 934.10 of the Florida Statutes and 18 U.S.C. 2511. It also uses the help pages of Google Voice, Quo and Zoom Phone. We read them on November 13, 2026. It is general information, not legal advice.
What the Florida statute says
Subsection (1) of section 934.03 begins “Except as otherwise specifically provided in this chapter”. It covers any person who “intentionally intercepts, endeavors to intercept, or procures any other person to intercept or endeavor to intercept any wire, oral, or electronic communication”.
Paragraph (2)(d) says it is lawful under that section and sections 934.04 to 934.09 for a person to intercept a wire, oral, or electronic communication. The condition: “when all of the parties to the communication have given prior consent to such interception”.
Paragraph (2)(e) says: “It is unlawful to intercept any wire, oral, or electronic communication for the purpose of committing any criminal act”. Subsection (2) lists other cases too. Among them are an operator of a switchboard, an investigative or law enforcement officer and an employee of a telephone company.
The words the statute defines
Section 934.02 lists the definitions the chapter uses. Subsection (1) defines wire communication as “any aural transfer made in whole or in part through the use of facilities for the transmission of communications”. The definition continues: “by the aid of wire, cable, or other like connection between the point of origin and the point of reception”. It then includes the use of such a connection in a switching station. The definition ends with a condition on who furnishes or operates the facilities and which communications they carry. The section has the exact words.
Subsection (18) defines aural transfer as “a transfer containing the human voice at any point between and including the point of origin and the point of reception”.
Subsection (2) defines oral communication as “any oral communication uttered by a person exhibiting an expectation that such communication is not subject to interception under circumstances justifying such expectation”. It adds that the term does not mean “any public oral communication uttered at a public meeting or any electronic communication”.
Subsection (12) defines electronic communication. It means “any transfer of signs, signals, writing, images, sounds, data, or intelligence of any nature”. The transfer is “transmitted in whole or in part by a wire, radio, electromagnetic, photoelectronic, or photooptical system”. The definition continues with “that affects intrastate, interstate, or foreign commerce”. The definition lists what the term does not include, beginning with “any wire or oral communication”.
Subsection (3) defines intercept as “the aural or other acquisition of the contents of any wire, electronic, or oral communication through the use of any electronic, mechanical, or other device”. Subsection (4) defines the electronic, mechanical, or other device as “any device or apparatus which can be used to intercept a wire, electronic, or oral communication”. The definition leaves out the items it then lists. The first is “any telephone or telegraph instrument, equipment, or facility, or any component thereof”. The section words the conditions for that item.
What federal law says
The federal statute is 18 U.S.C. 2511. Paragraph (2)(d) is written for a person “not acting under color of law”. It says interception of a wire, oral, or electronic communication by that person is not unlawful “where such person is a party to the communication”. The same goes “where one of the parties to the communication has given prior consent to such interception”.
The paragraph ends with an exception: “unless such communication is intercepted for the purpose of committing any criminal or tortious act”. The act is one “in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States or of any State”.
Subsection (2) of section 934.10 lists what a good faith reliance can rest on. Paragraph (2)(c) lists a good faith determination that Florida or federal law, “other than 18 U.S.C. s. 2511(2)(d)”, permitted the conduct complained of. Those words name the federal paragraph quoted above. The subsection says such reliance is a “complete defense” to any civil or criminal, or administrative action arising out of such conduct under Florida law.
What a person can recover in a civil action
Section 934.10 covers a person whose wire, oral, or electronic communication is intercepted, disclosed, or used in violation of sections 934.03 to 934.09. Subsection (1) says that person “shall have a civil cause of action”. It says the person is entitled to recover “such relief as may be appropriate”, including the items it lists.
Paragraph (1)(a) lists “preliminary or equitable or declaratory relief as may be appropriate”. Paragraph (1)(b) lists actual damages, but not less than liquidated damages. The paragraph says the liquidated damages are computed at the rate of $100.00 a day for each day of violation or $1,000.00, whichever is higher. Paragraph (1)(c) lists punitive damages. The list continues in the section itself.
Subsection (3) covers a civil action under that section. It “may not be commenced later than 2 years after the date upon which the claimant first has a reasonable opportunity to discover the violation”.
Tools that record calls
Google’s help page “Record calls” covers managed Google Workspace accounts and personal Google accounts. For on-demand recording on a managed account, it says “Voice plays an announcement to all participants that the recording has begun”. For automatic recording, it says that if a Google Workspace administrator has set all calls to be recorded, Voice plays an announcement at the start of the call. The announcement goes to all participants and says that recording has begun. For an incoming call on a personal account, it says “All participants hear an announcement that the recording has begun”.
Google’s page that compares Voice subscriptions lists “Call recording” for every plan it shows. It lists “Automatic call recording” for Voice Premier (Workspace add-on) only.
Quo’s help page “Call recording” says Business and Scale plan users can enable auto-recording for specific numbers. It lets you choose a notification type for inbound and outbound calls: a voice notification, an audio tone or no notification. It describes them as “Automatic verbal announcement”, “Beep reminder to manually notify” and “Manual notification required”. It also describes adding a custom message with call flows and gives this example: “This call is being recorded for quality and training purposes”.
The Zoom page on in-call controls covers Zoom Phone. Of the Record control it says: “You may hear an audio prompt notifying both parties that the call will be recorded (the audio prompt can be disabled by the admin)”.
Our guide to an AI receptionist for a small business has a section on the call recordings and transcripts that AI receptionist vendors mention.
Telling the other party
The word consent appears in (2)(c), (2)(d) and (3)(b)2 of section 934.03, and in (2)(c), (2)(d) and (3)(b)(ii) of 18 U.S.C. 2511. None of those passages says how consent is given.
Consent to receive text messages is a different subject. Our guide to TCPA rules for text messages covers it, along with hours and opt-outs.
Automation at Feedback Studios
Our automation page lists measurement for up to 8 events: forms, calls, WhatsApp clicks and appointments. It lists CRM and call tracking subscriptions as not included.
Our Google Ads page says the Growth plan adds call tracking. Neither page describes recording calls.
Our guide to Google Ads conversion tracking covers how Google Ads measures calls.
What to check before you record calls
In our view, check these points before you record calls:
- You have read the sections of the Florida Statutes and the federal statute that cover the calls you record.
- You know who is on each call before the recording starts.
- You know whether your tool records every call on its own or only when a person starts it.
- You know whether your tool tells the other party that the call is recorded, and who can switch that off.
- You know where the recordings are kept and who can play them.
- You know which plan includes call recording and which includes automatic call recording.
RememberSection 934.03(2)(d) of the Florida Statutes covers a wire, oral, or electronic communication. It says interception is lawful when all of the parties have given prior consent. The federal statute, 18 U.S.C. 2511(2)(d), is written for a person not acting under color of law. It says interception by that person is not unlawful where the person is a party or one of the parties has given prior consent. The federal statute makes an exception when the purpose is a criminal or tortious act in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States or of any State. Neither section says how consent is given. Section 934.10 gives a civil cause of action to a person whose communication is intercepted in violation of sections 934.03 to 934.09. That is what the pages said on November 13, 2026.
Questions about call recording
Is Florida a one-party consent state?
Section 934.03(2)(d) of the Florida Statutes covers a wire, oral, or electronic communication. It says interception is lawful “when all of the parties to the communication have given prior consent to such interception”. The section does not use the term one-party consent.
Do the Florida and federal statutes say how consent is given?
The word consent appears in (2)(c), (2)(d) and (3)(b)2 of section 934.03, and in (2)(c), (2)(d) and (3)(b)(ii) of 18 U.S.C. 2511. None of those passages says how consent is given.
What can a person recover under section 934.10?
Section 934.10(1) says a person whose communication is intercepted, disclosed, or used in violation of sections 934.03 to 934.09 “shall have a civil cause of action”. Its list includes preliminary or equitable or declaratory relief and punitive damages. The section also lists actual damages, but not less than liquidated damages computed at the rate of $100.00 a day for each day of violation or $1,000.00, whichever is higher.
How long does a person have to bring a civil action under section 934.10?
Section 934.10(3) covers a civil action under that section. It says the action “may not be commenced later than 2 years after the date upon which the claimant first has a reasonable opportunity to discover the violation”.
What do Google Voice, Quo and Zoom Phone say about telling the other party?
The Google Voice page says Voice plays an announcement to all participants that the recording has begun. The Quo page lists a voice notification, an audio tone and no notification. The Zoom page says you may hear an audio prompt notifying both parties and that the admin can disable the prompt.
Sources
All read on November 13, 2026. From the Florida Legislature’s Online Sunshine: The 2026 Florida Statutes, section 934.02. The 2026 Florida Statutes, section 934.03. The 2026 Florida Statutes, section 934.10. From uscode.house.gov: 18 U.S.C. § 2511: Interception and disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications prohibited. The page says its text contains the laws in effect through Public Law 119-142, November 10, 2026. From Google: Record calls - Computer - Google Voice Help and Compare Voice subscriptions. From Quo: Call recording. From Zoom: Using in-call controls.