spy chip for cellphone

What is it for?

I think he or she is talking about these. Or the chip used to make them, anyway.

I am talking about this :
http://cgi.ebay.com/Telefono-Microspia-GSM-distanza-ill...QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

In fact , what they call chip is something like a relay .It takes the power from the phone when a call is made and establishes a contact between the two wires . Two for the power and two for the contact . It's very small and I don't know the name in electronic .

Wouldn't that be against the law? Maybe not, but it sure sounds invasive.

What you do with your tool is what your brain wants and no more .

If ebay allows it to be sold, something tells me it must not be illegal. But, maybe I'm missing the little picture. Maybe it's an Italian thing.

Could be but I sure wouldn't appreciate it being used on my conversation! It does surprise me that it is legal because you cannot tap someone's phone without a court order nor tape a conversation without permission in the States.

quote:

Originally posted by Mrs.M.:
... nor tape a conversation without permission in the States.

Not true.

It is in this state and it is in Florida!!

USA secret services tapes worldwide communication and nobody says it's illegal !
This does not shock you ?England makes video of their crowd in most of their big cities nnot shocking ?Most of the shops have video system ,not shocking as well ?
Everybody in the world tries to have more information .

quote:

Originally posted by Mrs.M.:
It is in this state and it is in Florida!!

Maybe so, but it's not a Federal law.

Infact this little part that upset you is a single relay or semiconductor relay or solid-state relay relay . Nothing shocking ,just the way you could use it !

What the Secret Service does does not shock me because I am familiar with what that government agency does.

I just googled the part about taping conversations and it varies state by state but in almost all cases one of the parties conversing must be aware they are being taped. In some states, both parties must be aware of it. Bugging is simply illegal for the man on the street, so to speak.
Click Here

quote:

Originally posted by Mrs.M.:
but in almost all cases one of the parties conversing must be aware they are being taped.

True. Only ONE, not BOTH. I can tape any coversation I want with another person without that person's knowledge - even over the phone.

"Secret Service" - not much of a secret; not much of a service.

In SOME states one and in SOME state you both must know, but you cannot eavesdrop or tape as a third party ever.

quote:

Originally posted by Mrs.M.:
In SOME states one and in SOME state you both must know, but you cannot eavesdrop or tape as a third party ever.

YES! Which state requires both?

quote:

Originally posted by Mrs.M.:
... nor tape a conversation without permission in the States.

NO!

quote:

Should have been posted by Mrs.M.:
... nor tape a conversation without permission in maybe some of the States.

BETTER!

Twelve states require, under most circumstances, the consent of all parties to a conversation. Those jurisdictions are California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and Washington. Be aware that you will sometimes hear these referred to inaccurately as “two-party consent” laws. If there are more than two people involved in the conversation, all must consent to the taping.

If you go to my post a few back and click where it says " Click Here" you can read it. That is exacly what I did to see exactly how the states stood on the issue. However, I, in the beginning was refering to listening devices such as what I think this thing he wants is for. Then, you won't have to keep correcting me. You will know for yourself what states require what!

Mrs. M. - The regulations you are describing concern telecommunications (phone conversations). While it may be argued that these laws are applicable to the 'spy phone' modification, it could also be said that the 'conversation' is taking place with only one participant (the owner of the phone, who would be calling his own cell phone). The 'background' conversations heard over this connection would probably fall into a totally different law; presumably the one that covers recording of persons in public (there are release forms for this situation on several of the photography websites - goes along with taking pictures of people in public). The 'spy phone' modification is akin to those tiny little cameras that people are using to monitor thier babysitter ... and probably has varying regulations from state to state.

I don't agree that this would be the case in the US, but then I am not a judge.

quote:

Originally posted by Mrs.M.:
Then, you won't have to keep correcting me.

I’m tempted to say it’s a full time job, but I’m too nice to say that.

At least North Carolina isn’t one of the “two-party consent” states. Washington, D.C. must not be – Nixon could have gotten into some serious trouble.

Some day, perhaps we’ll have little devices attached so that all our conversations will be recorded. Sure would cut down on people with “convenient” memories. People might be a little more circumspect if they knew their conversations were being recorded. And, would be very helpful to biographers.

Lol, I think Nixon was....well his fall guys were in serious trouble!
Rick said:
"Some day, perhaps we’ll have little devices attached so that all our conversations will be recorded. Sure would cut down on people with “convenient” memories. People might be a little more circumspect if they knew their conversations were being recorded. And, would be very helpful to biographers."

I would agree with most of that statement..at least in therory!

Assuming I am where I am at the moment, Yes it is illigal here for a one party taping without the consent of the other party.

quote:

Originally posted by Mrs.M.:
I would agree with most of that statement..at least in therory!

"Most"? What do you disagree with - in theory?

quote:

Originally posted by Mrs.M.:
Assuming I am where I am at the moment,

You're not in N.C.?

quote:

Originally posted by Rick:

quote:

Originally posted by Mrs.M.:
I would agree with most of that statement..at least in therory!

"Most"? What do you disagree with - in theory?

I don't like things hanging around my neck and I find that pretty low tec!

quote:

Originally posted by Mrs.M.:
Assuming I am where I am at the moment,

You're not in N.C.?

Hmm, if you read what I said, I think it answers your question.

quote:

Originally posted by Mrs.M.:
Hmm, if you read what I said, I think it answers your question.

Which statement was that? Do you mean this? - "I don't like things hanging around my neck and I find that pretty low tec!"

Hard time understanding that last post. Seems you got confused with your quoting.

quote:

quote:
Originally posted by Mrs.M.:
Assuming I am where I am at the moment,
You're not in N.C.?


Hmm, if you read what I said, I think it answers your question.

That is confusing?

quote:

Originally posted by Mrs.M.:
That is confusing?

I’ll start over.

quote:

Originally posted by Mrs.M.:
Assuming I am where I am at the moment

Are you currently in North Carolina?

quote:

Originally posted by Mrs.M.:
Rick said:
"Some day, perhaps we’ll have little devices attached so that all our conversations will be recorded. Sure would cut down on people with “convenient” memories. People might be a little more circumspect if they knew their conversations were being recorded. And, would be very helpful to biographers."

I would agree with most of that statement..at least in therory!

“Mostly”? Which part do you disagree with?

quote:

quote:
Originally posted by Rick:

quote:
Originally posted by Mrs.M.:
I would agree with most of that statement..at least in therory!
"Most"? What do you disagree with - in theory?

I don't like things hanging around my neck and I find that pretty low tec!

If I were, it would be one party consent!

Let me see if I can summarize this one:

Rick said:
Some day, perhaps we’ll have little devices attached so that all our conversations will be recorded. Sure would cut down on people with “convenient” memories. People might be a little more circumspect if they knew their conversations were being recorded. And, would be very helpful to biographers.

Mrs. M. said:
I would agree with most of that statement..at least in therory!

Rick said:
"Most"? What do you disagree with - in theory?

Mrs. M. said:
I don't like things hanging around my neck and I find that pretty low tec!

Those cheaps are in fact relays but because they are very small and as there is no mechanical stuff in it ,it's electronical .
The two mini relays I found like this are made by Nec+cel and fairchild . To answer the last question , They are from USA .

Sorry "CHIP"

There is at least one UK one at:
http://www.cornerspystore.com
also lots of others listed under the search of:
electronic spy equipment.