Hybrid Consent Policy

Scope

Use this policy when a state applies different consent standards depending on whether the communication is in-person, telephonic, or in a particularly private setting.

Last reviewed: April 19, 2026.

States in this policy pack

Based on the Reporters Committee recording-law overview, these states are typically handled as mixed/hybrid:

• Connecticut (stricter for certain phone/call contexts)
• Nevada (stricter for certain phone/call contexts)
• Missouri (stricter for certain in-person contexts)
• Oregon (stricter for certain in-person contexts)
• Hawaii (stricter in particularly private places)
• Maine (stricter in particularly private places)

Aquil required controls

• Classify each recording workflow by communication type:

1. In-person conversation
2. Telephone/VoIP communication
3. Highly private-place scenario

• Apply the stricter consent path when classification is uncertain.
• Require legal sign-off before enabling recording features in hybrid states.
• Keep state-specific configuration profiles in deployment documentation.

Configuration pattern

• mode=all_party for workflows that may trigger stricter requirements
• mode=one_party only where counsel has approved specific use case + channel
• mode=disabled for high-risk zones or unsupported compliance workflows

Cross-state rule

For interstate calls or multi-location meetings, apply the strictest rule across all participant locations unless counsel approves otherwise.

Legal notice

This policy is a compliance aid and not legal advice.

Source notes

• Reporters Committee Recording Guide (Introduction) (hybrid state overview; accessed April 19, 2026)