California Video Recording Laws: Filming, Surveillance, and Consent (2026)

California allows video recording without audio in public spaces because Penal Code 632 covers only confidential communications, not silent footage. Secretly viewing or recording someone in a bedroom, bathroom, changing room, or other private area with intent to invade their privacy, or filming under or through their clothing, violates Penal Code 647(j) and is usually charged as a misdemeanor.

Quick Answer

California treats video recording differently depending on whether the recording captures audio, where it takes place, and whether it involves a reasonable expectation of privacy. Video recording without audio is not governed by the state's two-party consent wiretapping law (Penal Code 632), which only applies to confidential communications. However, other California statutes restrict video recording in private settings, prohibit voyeurism, regulate workplace surveillance, and impose penalties for distributing intimate images without consent.

This guide covers all the major California laws that apply to video recording in 2026, including recent legislation targeting AI-generated deepfakes and the 2026 wearable-device bill that the Governor vetoed.

Video Recording vs. Audio Recording in California

Why the Distinction Matters

California is a two-party (all-party) consent state for recording confidential communications. Penal Code 632 makes it illegal to use "an electronic amplifying or recording device to eavesdrop upon or record the confidential communication" without consent from all parties. The penalties for violating PC 632 include fines up to $2,500 per violation for a first offense and up to $10,000 per violation for subsequent offenses, plus up to one year in county jail or a state prison term for either.

However, PC 632 specifically targets audio recording of communications. A silent video recording that captures no sound does not constitute "eavesdropping" or recording of a "confidential communication" under the statute.

What This Means in Practice

If you record video without audio in California:

• PC 632 does not apply because there is no recorded communication
• PC 647(j) still applies if you secretly record someone in a bedroom, bathroom, changing room or similar private area, or under or through their clothing
• Civil Code 1708.8 still applies if you invade someone's privacy to capture the footage
• Other privacy torts may apply if the recording intrudes on a reasonable expectation of privacy

If you record video with audio in California:

• PC 632 applies and you need consent from all parties to the conversation
• All video-specific statutes also apply
• Federal wiretap laws may apply to interstate communications

The practical takeaway: adding audio to a video recording in California creates significantly more legal exposure. Many security camera systems in California record video only for this reason.

Filming in Public Spaces

First Amendment Protections

The First Amendment protects the right to film in public spaces where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy. In California, you can generally:

• Film on public streets, sidewalks, and parks
• Record public protests and demonstrations
• Film buildings and landmarks from public property
• Record public meetings and government proceedings
• Film your own interactions with businesses and service providers

The California State Library photography and filming policy confirms that recording is permitted in public government facilities, subject to reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions.

Filming Police and Public Officials

You have the right to record law enforcement officers performing their duties in public. The California Department of State Hospitals has issued a formal policy on public recording of law enforcement activity that acknowledges this right. Federal courts have consistently recognized that filming police in public is protected by the First Amendment.

When recording police in California, keep these rules in mind:

• Do not physically interfere with officers performing their duties
• Do not cross police tape or enter restricted areas to film
• Follow lawful orders to maintain a safe distance
• Officers cannot order you to delete footage, and they generally need a warrant to search your phone; in some situations, such as to keep evidence from being destroyed, they may temporarily take and hold a device while they seek a warrant, so do not physically resist and state that you do not consent to a search
• You do not need to stop recording if ordered to do so, as long as you are not interfering

For more on this topic, see our full guide on California laws on recording police.

Limitations on Public Filming

Even in public spaces, some restrictions apply:

• Commercial filming on California state park land requires a permit from the California Film Commission
• Recording on federal lands in California may require a permit under the EXPLORE Act (enacted January 2025) for commercial purposes
• Filming that constitutes harassment or stalking can violate California Penal Code 646.9
• Recording where prohibited by signage on private property open to the public (stores, restaurants) may constitute trespass if you refuse to stop

Penal Code 647(j): Video Voyeurism and Invasion of Privacy

What the Law Prohibits

Penal Code 647(j) is California's primary criminal statute addressing invasive video recording. It covers several distinct types of conduct:

PC 647(j)(1) -- Viewing or Recording in Private Spaces: It is illegal to use any instrument, including a camera, telescope, binoculars, or periscope, to look through a window or other opening into a bedroom, bathroom, or similar private area to view the occupant with the intent to invade their privacy.

PC 647(j)(2) -- Upskirt/Hidden Camera Recording: It is illegal to use a concealed camcorder, motion picture camera, or photographic camera to secretly film "under or through the clothing" of another person without their consent for the purpose of viewing their body or undergarments. This provision targets "upskirting" and similar invasive recording.

PC 647(j)(3) -- Recording Undressed Persons: It is illegal to use a concealed camera to secretly record an identifiable person "in a state of full or partial undress" in any room where the person has a reasonable expectation of privacy, without that person's knowledge or consent. This covers hidden cameras in bathrooms, changing rooms, bedrooms, locker rooms, and similar spaces.

Penalties Under PC 647(j)

Most violations of PC 647(j) are misdemeanors under California law:

In addition to criminal penalties, victims can sue in civil court for invasion of privacy. If the recording also captured a confidential conversation, Penal Code 637.2 allows the greater of $5,000 per violation or three times actual damages, plus an injunction; it applies to Invasion of Privacy Act violations such as PC 632, not to 647(j) itself. Where the recording involved trespass or a device used to capture private activity, Civil Code 1708.8 allows up to three times damages, punitive damages, and a $5,000 to $50,000 civil fine.

Security Camera Laws in California

Residential Security Cameras

California law permits homeowners and renters to install security cameras on their own property. The legal framework for residential cameras includes:

What is permitted:

• Cameras on your property facing your own yard, driveway, and entry points
• Doorbell cameras (Ring, Nest, etc.) aimed at your front door and porch
• Interior cameras in common areas of your own home

What is restricted:

• Cameras aimed directly into a neighbor's windows, bedrooms, or private spaces (violates PC 647(j))
• Audio recording by security cameras without consent of all parties (violates PC 632)
• Hidden cameras in areas where guests or tenants have a reasonable expectation of privacy

Signage and notice requirements: Property owners who operate camera systems that record beyond their property boundaries should post visible surveillance notices at property entrances. While there is no statewide mandate requiring signage for purely private residential cameras aimed at your own property, posting signs is considered a best practice and can help establish that recorded parties were on notice.

Commercial Security Cameras

Businesses in California can install security cameras in areas where the public and employees do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy. This includes:

• Sales floors, lobbies, and reception areas
• Parking lots and exterior building perimeters
• Warehouses and shipping areas
• Cash register areas and point-of-sale locations

Businesses cannot place cameras in:

• Restrooms and bathrooms
• Employee changing rooms and locker rooms
• Private offices where employees have been told conversations are confidential
• Break rooms designated as private employee spaces

Some industries in California are required by regulation to maintain video surveillance. Banks, certain retail establishments, and cannabis dispensaries must operate security camera systems as a condition of their business licenses.

Security Camera Audio Recording

This is where many California property owners run into trouble. Because California is a two-party consent state for audio recording, a security camera that records audio may violate PC 632 if it captures confidential conversations without consent. Many security professionals in California recommend disabling audio recording on security cameras or posting clear notice that audio recording is in progress.

Workplace Video Surveillance

Current California Law

California does not have a single comprehensive workplace video surveillance statute. Instead, workplace video monitoring is governed by a combination of:

• California Constitution, Article I, Section 1: Provides a right to privacy that applies to both government and private-sector employees
• Penal Code 647(j): Prohibits video recording in areas where workers have a reasonable expectation of privacy
• Labor Code provisions: Restrict monitoring in certain contexts
• CCPA/CPRA: Gives employees rights over personal data, including video and biometric data collected in the workplace

Employers in California can install video cameras in common work areas such as hallways, production floors, and open office spaces. Employers cannot install cameras in restrooms, locker rooms, or other private employee areas. While not legally required in all cases, providing employees with written notice about video surveillance is a strongly recommended best practice.

New Workplace Surveillance Legislation (2025-2026)

The California Legislature has introduced several bills to regulate workplace surveillance more comprehensively:

AB 1331 (Workplace Surveillance): AB 1331 (Chapter 851, Statutes of 2026), signed September 30, 2026 and effective January 1, 2027, bars employers from using workplace surveillance tools, including video or audio, to monitor employees in workplace bathrooms unless a court orders it, and lets employees leave surveillance devices behind when they enter a bathroom. The Labor Commissioner and public prosecutors enforce it, with civil penalties of up to $500 per violation.

AB 1221 and SB 238 (Workplace Surveillance Notification): These bills would have required employers to give workers notice of workplace surveillance tools. Neither became law: AB 1221 died in January 2026, and SB 238 stalled in an Assembly committee and was not passed before the 2025-26 session ended. No California statute currently requires general advance notice of workplace video surveillance, although businesses covered by the CCPA must give notice at collection.

CCPA/CPRA and Workplace Video

Under the California Consumer Privacy Act as amended by the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA), employees have specific rights related to video data collected in the workplace:

• Right to know what personal information (including video footage) the employer collects
• Right to limit the use of sensitive personal information, which includes biometric data
• Right to delete personal information in certain circumstances
• Right to opt out of the sale or sharing of personal information

The California Privacy Protection Agency finalized regulations in September 2025 covering cybersecurity audits, risk assessments, and automated decision-making technology (ADMT), effective January 1, 2026. Employers using video surveillance systems with facial recognition or AI analytics should evaluate their compliance with these new rules.

Revenge Porn and Nonconsensual Intimate Images

Penal Code 647(j)(4): Criminal Penalties

Penal Code 647(j)(4) makes it a crime to intentionally distribute intimate images of another identifiable person when:

• One of the following is true: the person depicted and the distributor agreed or understood the image would remain private; the distributor knowingly took or obtained the image without permission where the person had a reasonable expectation of privacy; or the distributor obtained it by exceeding authorized access to the person's property, accounts, or files
• The person distributing the image knows or should know that distribution will cause serious emotional distress
• The person depicted actually suffers that distress

The California Attorney General's office maintains a dedicated cyber exploitation page with resources for victims and law enforcement.

Penalties: A first violation is a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in county jail, a fine up to $1,000, or both. A second violation carries up to one year in county jail and a fine up to $2,000. A criminal complaint must be filed within one year after the distribution is discovered, and no later than four years after the image was distributed (Penal Code 803(i)(2)).

SB 926: AI-Generated Deepfake Intimate Images

Governor Newsom signed SB 926 into law on September 19, 2024, effective January 1, 2025. This law expanded California's revenge porn statute to cover AI-generated sexually explicit deepfakes. SB 926 makes it a crime to create and distribute AI-generated sexually explicit images of an identifiable person:

• When the image is realistic enough that a reasonable person would believe it is authentic
• When the distributor knows or should know distribution will cause serious emotional distress
• When the depicted person actually suffers that distress

This law was part of a broader legislative package addressing AI and deepfakes, authored by Senator Aisha Wahab (D-Hayward). The Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office noted that 90 to 95 percent of all deepfakes online are nonconsensual intimate media, making this a growing area of criminal law.

Civil Code 1708.85: Civil Remedies for Victims

Civil Code 1708.85 provides victims of nonconsensual intimate image distribution with civil remedies, including:

• Temporary restraining orders
• Injunctive relief (court orders to remove images)
• Monetary damages
• The ability to file under a pseudonym to protect privacy during litigation

The Anti-Paparazzi Law: Civil Code 1708.8

Physical and Constructive Invasion of Privacy

California enacted the nation's first anti-paparazzi law in 1998 following the death of Princess Diana. Civil Code 1708.8 creates civil liability for two types of conduct:

Physical invasion of privacy occurs when a person knowingly enters another person's land or airspace without permission, or commits a trespass, to capture visual images, sound recordings, or other impressions of someone engaged in a private, personal, or familial activity. The invasion must be offensive to a reasonable person.

Constructive invasion of privacy occurs when a person uses any device (such as a telephoto lens, directional microphone, or drone) to capture images of someone engaged in a personal or familial activity, under circumstances where the person has a reasonable expectation of privacy, and the image could not have been captured without trespassing unless the device was used.

Drone-Specific Provisions

AB 856, signed in 2015, amended Civil Code 1708.8 to explicitly include entering "the airspace above the land of another person" in the definition of physical invasion of privacy. This means flying a drone over someone's property to record them engaged in private activities carries the same civil liability as physically trespassing.

Penalties and Damages

Violators of Civil Code 1708.8 face significant financial consequences:

A "commercial purpose" is defined as any act done with the expectation of a sale, financial gain, or other consideration. When the recording was made for profit, the court can order the violator to surrender all proceeds.

Exemptions

The statute exempts law enforcement and government employees conducting investigations supported by articulable suspicion. It also protects secondary distributors who republish previously lawful material.

Wearable Recording Devices and Smart Glasses

SB 1130: The Wearable Device Privacy Protection Act (Vetoed September 30, 2026)

Senator Eloise Gomez Reyes introduced SB 1130 on February 17, 2026, to address a growing gap in California privacy law created by commercially available smart glasses and wearable recording devices. The Governor vetoed the bill on September 30, 2026, so none of it took effect. The Assembly passed it 57 to 14 and the Senate concurred 29 to 10. Consideration of the veto is pending in the Senate; an override needs two-thirds of each house's membership.

As enrolled, SB 1130 would have added Penal Code 632.8 and Sections 22949.85 to 22949.88 of the Business and Professions Code. The Penal Code section would have:

• Required explicit consent before using a wearable recording device to capture sound or video of others in a place of business where people have a reasonable expectation of privacy
• Prohibited disabling the recording indicator light on any wearable device
• Defined "place of business" as any physical office or retail establishment where the public receives goods or services
• Defined "wearable recording device" as any device worn on or attached to the body with recording or transmission capabilities

Penalties SB 1130 would have carried (none of them are in force):

Current Law on Smart Glasses

California has no statute specific to wearable recording devices. Smart glasses are governed by the general statutes:

• Audio recording through smart glasses is subject to PC 632 all-party consent requirements
• Video-only recording in public spaces is generally permitted
• **Video recording in private spaces** without consent can violate PC 647(j) when it is done secretly in a bedroom, bathroom, changing room or similar area with intent to invade privacy
• Biometric data captured by smart glasses (facial geometry, gait analysis) may be regulated under the CCPA/CPRA as sensitive personal information

Recording on Private Property

Landlord and Tenant Situations

California law addresses video recording in rental properties:

• Landlords can install security cameras in common areas (lobbies, parking structures, exterior hallways) with proper notice
• Landlords cannot install cameras inside rental units or in areas where tenants have a reasonable expectation of privacy
• Tenants can install security cameras within their own units without landlord consent (subject to lease terms about modifications)
• Tenants can record video of their own interactions with landlords if they are in a common area or public space

For detailed coverage, see our guide on California landlord-tenant recording and surveillance laws.

Businesses and Customers

Businesses in California may record customers on video in areas open to the public without individual consent. This includes:

• Store aisles and shopping areas
• Restaurant dining rooms
• Hotel lobbies and common areas
• Parking lots

However, businesses should post visible signage indicating that video surveillance is in use, and audio recording requires all-party consent under PC 632.

Using Video Recordings as Evidence in California

Admissibility Standards

Video recordings are admissible as evidence in California courts when they meet authentication and relevance requirements under the California Evidence Code:

• Authentication (Evidence Code 1400-1421): The offering party must prove the video is a fair and accurate representation of what it claims to show
• Relevance (Evidence Code 350-352): The video must tend to prove or disprove a fact at issue
• Secondary evidence rule (Evidence Code 1520-1523): Copies are generally admissible unless there is a genuine dispute about the content or admitting the copy would be unfair

Illegally Obtained Recordings

Under Penal Code 632(d), evidence obtained as a result of eavesdropping upon or recording a confidential communication in violation of that section is inadmissible in any judicial, administrative, legislative, or other proceeding. This exclusionary rule applies to recordings that violate PC 632 (audio recording without consent). In criminal cases, however, the California Supreme Court held in People v. Guzman (2019) that Proposition 8's Truth-in-Evidence provision abrogated this rule, so a relevant recording can be used in a criminal prosecution. The exclusion still applies in civil, administrative, and other non-criminal proceedings.

A video-only recording made in violation of PC 647(j) is not automatically excluded by statute, but making it can expose the recorder to criminal charges and civil liability.

Penalties Summary: California Video Recording Violations

More California Recording Topics

• California Biometric Privacy Laws
• Surveillance Camera Laws

More California Recording Laws

• California Audio Recording Laws
• California Dashcam Laws
• California Laws on Recording Doctors
• California Laws on Recording in Public
• California Phone Call Recording Laws
• California School Recording Laws
• California Security Camera and Surveillance Laws
• California Voyeurism and Hidden Camera Laws
• California Workplace Recording Laws

More California Laws

• California AI Meeting Recording Laws
• California Dashcam Laws
• California Data Privacy Laws
• California Deepfake Laws
• California Employee Monitoring Laws
• California GPS Tracking Laws
• California Police Bodycam Laws
• California Smart Glasses Recording Laws

Frequently Asked Questions

Is it legal to film someone without their consent in California?

It depends on the location and whether you record audio. Filming someone in a public space without audio is generally legal in California. However, secretly recording someone in a bedroom, bathroom, changing room, or other private area with intent to invade their privacy violates Penal Code 647(j). Adding audio to any recording triggers California's all-party consent law under Penal Code 632, meaning you need consent from everyone in the conversation. Filming someone through their window or using a drone over their property can also create civil liability under Civil Code 1708.8.

Can I put security cameras on my property in California?

Yes. California law allows homeowners and businesses to install security cameras on their own property. Cameras should be aimed at your own property and not directly into a neighbor's private spaces like bedrooms or bathrooms. Audio recording on security cameras is restricted by Penal Code 632, so many California security professionals recommend disabling audio or posting clear notice that audio is being recorded. Posting visible signage about your surveillance system is recommended, especially if your cameras capture areas beyond your property, but no statewide law requires it for residential cameras; check local ordinances.

What are the penalties for secretly recording someone on video in California?

Under Penal Code 647(j), secretly recording someone with a concealed camera in a bedroom, bathroom, changing room or similar private area, or under or through their clothing, with intent to invade their privacy, is usually a misdemeanor. A first offense carries up to 6 months in county jail and a fine of up to $1,000. A second or subsequent offense increases the maximum to 1 year in jail and a $2,000 fine, and a repeat hidden-camera offense against a minor can be charged as a felony. Victims can also sue for invasion of privacy, and if the recording captured a confidential conversation, Penal Code 637.2 allows the greater of $5,000 per violation or three times actual damages. If the recording involved a physical or constructive invasion of privacy, Civil Code 1708.8 allows fines of $5,000 to $50,000 plus treble damages.

Can my employer record me on video at work in California?

Employers in California can use video surveillance in common work areas such as production floors, hallways, and open offices. They cannot place cameras in restrooms, locker rooms, or changing areas. California does not have a comprehensive workplace surveillance law. AB 1331, signed September 30, 2026 and effective January 1, 2027, bars employers from using surveillance tools to monitor employees in workplace bathrooms unless a court orders it and lets employees leave surveillance devices behind when they enter a bathroom. Broader notice bills (AB 1221 and SB 238) did not become law. Under the CCPA/CPRA, employees also have the right to know what personal data, including video and biometric data, their employer collects.

Is sharing someone's intimate video without consent illegal in California?

Yes. Penal Code 647(j)(4) makes it a misdemeanor to distribute intimate images when the distributor knows or should know distribution will cause serious emotional distress, the victim actually suffers that distress, and either the two agreed the images would stay private, the distributor took or obtained the images without permission where the person expected privacy, or the distributor got them by exceeding authorized access to the person's devices or accounts. SB 926, signed into law in September 2024, expanded this to cover AI-generated deepfake intimate images. Victims can also pursue civil remedies under Civil Code 1708.85, including restraining orders, injunctive relief, and damages. The deadline to file criminal charges is one year after the distribution is discovered, and no more than four years after the distribution.