Kentucky
Kentucky Voyeurism and Hidden Camera Laws: Offenses, Penalties, and Protections
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 15, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of August 15, 2026. · 9 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content
Kentucky's voyeurism statute, KRS 531.090, makes it a Class A misdemeanor to intentionally view, photograph, film, or record another person's intimate areas without their knowledge or consent in a place where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy, carrying penalties up to 12 months in jail and a $500 fine.
Kentucky law addresses voyeurism, hidden cameras, and nonconsensual image distribution through two primary statutes: KRS 531.090 (voyeurism) and KRS 531.120 (nonconsensual distribution of sexually explicit images). Together, these laws protect individuals from covert visual intrusions into their privacy and from the unauthorized sharing of intimate images.
This guide provides a thorough analysis of both statutes, their penalties, common scenarios where they apply, and how they interact with Kentucky's broader eavesdropping and recording laws.
Kentucky Voyeurism Statute: KRS 531.090
Elements of the Offense
Under KRS 531.090, a person commits voyeurism when they intentionally:
- Use a camera or recording device, the unaided eye or a visual-acuity device, or unlawfully enter or remain on another's premises, for the purpose of observing, viewing, photographing, filming, or videotaping
- A person's sexual conduct, genitals, an undergarment that is not worn publicly visible, or the nipple of the female breast
- Without that person's consent
- When the other person is in a place where a reasonable person would believe those areas or that conduct will not be observed, viewed, photographed, filmed, or videotaped without their knowledge
All elements must be present for a voyeurism conviction. KRS 531.090 does not require proof that the defendant acted for the purpose of sexual arousal or gratification. It requires only that the observing, viewing, or recording targeted the specific body parts or conduct the statute lists, without consent, in a place where the victim reasonably expected not to be observed.
What the Statute Protects
KRS 531.090 does not define or use the term "intimate areas." It specifically prohibits observing, viewing, photographing, filming, or videotaping a person's sexual conduct, genitals, an undergarment worn without being publicly visible, or the nipple of the female breast, without that person's consent, in a place where a reasonable person would believe those areas or that conduct will not be observed without their knowledge. The statute does not separately address the pubic area, buttocks, or a rule for sheer or see-through clothing; those terms are not part of its text.
Reasonable Expectation of Privacy
The victim must have a reasonable expectation of privacy at the time of the offense. Places where this expectation is strongest include:
- Private residences (bedrooms, bathrooms)
- Restrooms in any building
- Locker rooms and changing areas
- Dressing rooms in retail stores
- Hotel and motel rooms
- Medical examination rooms
- Tanning salons
A person in a public park wearing normal clothing has a reasonable expectation that no one is using a camera to look up their skirt or down their shirt, even though they are technically in a public place. The statute protects against this type of intrusion.
Penalty for Voyeurism
Voyeurism under KRS 531.090 is classified as a Class A misdemeanor in Kentucky.
| Penalty Component | Maximum |
|---|---|
| Jail time | Up to 12 months |
| Fine | Up to $500 |
Kentucky's probation and conditional discharge statutes (KRS Chapter 533) allow a court to impose these conditions as part of sentencing.
Nonconsensual Distribution of Sexually Explicit Images: KRS 531.120
What the Statute Prohibits
KRS 531.120, enacted in 2018, makes it illegal to intentionally distribute or publish sexually explicit images of another person without that person's written consent. This statute is Kentucky's response to what is commonly called "revenge porn."
The statute applies when:
- A person intentionally distributes a visual image of another person
- The image depicts the other person in a state of nudity or engaged in sexual conduct
- The image was obtained under circumstances where the depicted person had a reasonable expectation of privacy
- The depicted person did not give written consent to the distribution
Key Definitions
"Distribute" means to sell, give, provide, lend, trade, mail, deliver, transfer, publish, or otherwise make available to another person.
"Sexually explicit images" includes photographs, films, video recordings, digital images, or any visual depiction showing nudity or sexual conduct.
"Written consent" is specifically required. Verbal consent, implied consent, or consent given through text messages does not satisfy the statutory requirement.
Penalty Structure
| Offense Level | Classification | Prison/Jail | Fine |
|---|---|---|---|
| First offense | Class A misdemeanor | Up to 12 months in jail | Up to $500 |
| Second or subsequent offense | Class D felony | 1 to 5 years in prison | $1,000 to $10,000 |
| Distribution for profit, first offense | Class D felony | 1 to 5 years in prison | $1,000 to $10,000 |
| Distribution for profit, second or subsequent offense | Class C felony | 5 to 10 years in prison | $1,000 to $10,000 |
The escalation to a Class D felony for repeat offenses and first-offense profit-motivated distribution, rising to a Class C felony for a second or subsequent for-profit offense, reflects the severity with which Kentucky treats this conduct.
What Does Not Violate KRS 531.120
The statute includes several exceptions. It does not apply to:
- Images distributed with the written consent of the depicted person
- Lawful and common practices of law enforcement, criminal reporting, or legal proceedings
- Medical or scientific practices
- Reporting unlawful conduct
- Images voluntarily distributed by the depicted person themselves
Hidden Camera Scenarios and Kentucky Law
Bathroom and Restroom Cameras
Installing a hidden camera in a bathroom, whether in a private home, a business, or a public facility, is one of the clearest voyeurism violations. Any person who places a recording device in a location designed to capture images of people using the restroom will face voyeurism charges under KRS 531.090.
If the captured images are subsequently distributed, additional charges under KRS 531.120 may apply. If audio is also recorded, KRS 526.020 (eavesdropping, a Class D felony) could be charged as well.
Locker Room and Changing Area Cameras
Gyms, swimming pools, sports facilities, and retail stores with fitting rooms are frequent locations for hidden camera offenses. Kentucky law treats these spaces as areas with a high expectation of privacy.
Hidden Cameras in Bedrooms
Placing a hidden camera in someone's bedroom without their knowledge, including a partner's or spouse's bedroom, constitutes voyeurism if the recording captures that person's sexual conduct, genitals, a non-publicly-visible undergarment, or the nipple of the female breast without their consent, in circumstances where they reasonably expected not to be observed or recorded.
Workplace Hidden Cameras
An employer who installs hidden cameras in restrooms, locker rooms, or changing areas violates KRS 531.090. Cameras in regular work areas do not typically constitute voyeurism, but adding hidden cameras specifically aimed at capturing intimate areas of employees would violate the statute.
Short-Term Rental and Hotel Cameras
Hosts of Airbnb, VRBO, or similar short-term rental properties in Kentucky who install hidden cameras in bedrooms or bathrooms commit voyeurism. Kentucky law enforcement has investigated several such cases. Guests have a clear reasonable expectation of privacy in sleeping and bathing areas.
Relationship Between Voyeurism and Other Kentucky Laws
Voyeurism vs. Eavesdropping (KRS 526.020)
These are separate offenses that can overlap. Eavesdropping under KRS 526.020 covers the audio interception of communications without consent. Voyeurism under KRS 531.090 covers the visual recording of intimate areas without consent.
A hidden camera with audio capabilities that captures both video and sound in a private area could result in charges under both statutes. The eavesdropping charge is a Class D felony (1 to 5 years), while the voyeurism charge is a Class A misdemeanor (up to 12 months). Prosecutors often charge both when the evidence supports it.
Voyeurism vs. Stalking (KRS 508.130)
Repeated voyeuristic conduct directed at the same person could also constitute stalking under Kentucky law. Effective July 15, 2026, Kentucky consolidated its stalking offense into a single statute, KRS 508.130, which replaced the former two-degree structure; the old stalking-in-the-first-degree (KRS 508.140) and stalking-in-the-second-degree (KRS 508.150) sections are now repealed. Under current KRS 508.130, a person is guilty of stalking when they intentionally engage in a course of conduct directed at another person that seriously alarms, annoys, intimidates, or harasses that person, serves no legitimate purpose, and causes substantial mental distress. Stalking is a Class D felony, and it becomes a Class C felony where aggravating circumstances apply, including when the defendant's conduct places the victim in reasonable fear of sexual contact, physical injury, or death.
Voyeurism Involving Minors
When voyeurism targets a person under 18, additional statutes come into play. Creating sexually explicit images of a minor may constitute the production of child pornography under both Kentucky law (KRS 531.300 through 531.370) and federal law (18 U.S.C. 2251). These are serious felonies carrying substantial prison sentences.
The distribution of sexually explicit images of a minor is a separate federal offense under 18 U.S.C. 2252, with mandatory minimum sentences.
Civil Remedies for Voyeurism Victims
Tort Claims
Victims of voyeurism in Kentucky can pursue civil lawsuits against the perpetrator. KRS Chapter 526 provides no private civil cause of action (KRS 526.080 addresses forfeiture only), so plaintiffs rely on the federal wiretap civil remedy under 18 U.S.C. 2520 where wire or electronic interception occurred, and Kentucky common-law torts. Available theories include:
- Federal ECPA civil remedy (18 U.S.C. 2520): Where voyeurism involves electronic interception, provides statutory damages ($100/day, minimum $10,000), actual damages, punitive damages, and attorney fees
- Invasion of privacy (intrusion upon seclusion): Kentucky courts recognize this tort under McCall v. Courier-Journal, 623 S.W.2d 882 (Ky. 1981), requiring an intentional intrusion highly offensive to a reasonable person
- Intentional infliction of emotional distress: Voyeuristic conduct that causes severe emotional harm can support this claim
- Negligence per se: Violating KRS 531.090 or KRS 531.120 can establish the duty and breach elements of a negligence claim
Potential Damages
Civil remedies available to voyeurism victims include:
- Actual damages for emotional distress, therapy costs, and other harm
- Punitive damages when the conduct was willful or malicious
- Injunctive relief ordering the destruction of images and prohibition of further distribution
- Attorney fees and court costs
Protective Orders
Victims can seek protective orders under Kentucky law. KRS 456.060 allows courts to issue interpersonal protective orders that can prohibit the respondent from contacting the victim, require the destruction of images, and impose other conditions to protect the victim's safety and privacy.
Sex Offender Registration
Voyeurism convictions under KRS 531.090 do not automatically require sex offender registration in Kentucky. However, if the voyeurism involved a minor victim, the court may impose registration requirements depending on the specific circumstances and any additional charges.
Convictions for distributing sexually explicit images of minors do carry sex offender registration requirements under Kentucky State Police sex offender registry guidelines.
Reporting Voyeurism in Kentucky
If you discover a hidden camera or believe you are a victim of voyeurism:
- Do not touch or remove the device if possible. Leave it in place for law enforcement to document and collect as evidence.
- Contact local law enforcement immediately. You can call 911 for emergencies or the non-emergency police number for your jurisdiction.
- Document what you found by photographing the location and device from a distance.
- Preserve any evidence such as screenshots, messages, or links if images have been distributed.
- Contact the Kentucky Attorney General's Office if you need guidance on your rights or reporting options.
Federal TAKE IT DOWN Act and Kentucky AI Law
The TAKE IT DOWN Act, signed into law May 19, 2025, provides federal civil and criminal remedies for nonconsensual intimate image sharing (NCII) -- including AI-generated deepfakes. Its platform takedown-enforcement requirement, obligating platforms to remove qualifying content within 48 hours of a valid notice, became operative one year later, on May 19, 2026. This supplements KRS 531.120 for image-based abuse.
Note on Kentucky SB 4 (2025): Kentucky's AI law (Acts Ch. 66, signed Mar. 24, 2025) governs AI-generated synthetic media in elections only, through the civil cause of action at KRS 117.322. Kentucky has no general state deepfake or NCII-deepfake law outside the election context. References to HB 91, HB 213, or SB 113 as enacted Kentucky AI laws are incorrect -- none passed.
More Kentucky Recording Laws
Audio Recording | Video Recording | Voyeurism and Hidden Cameras | Workplace Recording | Recording Police | Phone Call Recording | Security Cameras | Recording in Public | Landlord-Tenant Recording | Dashcam Laws | School Recording | Medical Recording
Back to Kentucky Recording Laws
More Kentucky Recording Topics
More Kentucky Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the penalty for voyeurism in Kentucky?
Voyeurism under KRS 531.090 is a Class A misdemeanor, punishable by up to 12 months in jail and fines up to $500. If the voyeuristic images are distributed without consent, additional charges under KRS 531.120 may apply, which can be a Class D felony for repeat offenses.
Is it illegal to share intimate photos without consent in Kentucky?
Yes. KRS 531.120 makes it illegal to distribute sexually explicit images without the depicted person's written consent. A first offense is a Class A misdemeanor. A second or subsequent offense is a Class D felony punishable by 1 to 5 years in prison. Distribution for profit or gain is a Class D felony on the first offense, and a Class C felony punishable by 5 to 10 years in prison for a second or subsequent for-profit offense.
Are hidden cameras illegal in Kentucky?
Hidden cameras are illegal when used to view or record someone's intimate areas without their knowledge or consent in a place where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy. This includes bathrooms, bedrooms, locker rooms, and changing areas. Hidden cameras in these locations constitute voyeurism under KRS 531.090.
Can I be charged with both voyeurism and eavesdropping in Kentucky?
Yes. If a hidden camera captures both video and audio, you could face voyeurism charges under KRS 531.090 (Class A misdemeanor) and eavesdropping charges under KRS 526.020 (Class D felony). The eavesdropping charge carries the more severe penalty of 1 to 5 years in prison.
Does verbal consent count for sharing intimate images in Kentucky?
No. KRS 531.120 specifically requires written consent for the distribution of sexually explicit images. Verbal permission, implied consent, or consent given through text messages does not satisfy the statute. Only written consent protects the person distributing the images.
Updates
Corrected the TAKE IT DOWN Act's signing date (May 19, 2025, not 2026 -- 2026 is when the platform takedown requirement took effect) and repointed three misrouted or invalid Kentucky statute citation links (the child-exploitation chapter, KRS 456.060, and KRS 117.322).
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Corrected the election-deepfake citation from KRS 42.731 to KRS 117.322, and removed a misattribution of probation/conditional-discharge authority to KRS 532.090 (which sets only maximum jail terms).
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Corrected the voyeurism elements and 'intimate areas' definition to match KRS 531.090's actual text (no sexual-arousal-or-gratification element; the statute protects sexual conduct, genitals, non-public undergarments, and the female nipple, not a fabricated pubic-area/buttocks/areola list), fixed the distribution-for-profit penalty table and FAQ (a second or subsequent for-profit offense is a Class C felony, 5-10 years, not Class D), and updated the stalking cross-reference to Kentucky's July 2026 consolidation of KRS 508.140/508.150 into a single KRS 508.130.
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Reviewed and approved by an editor
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Kentucky Revised Statutes, Chapter 531: PORNOGRAPHY
§ 531.090VoyeurismIn forcecited in 13 of our articles
(1) A person is guilty of voyeurism when: (a) He or she intentionally: 1. Uses or causes the use of any camera, videotape, photooptical, photoelectric, or other image recording device for the purpose of observing, viewing, photographing, filming, or videotaping the sexual conduct, genitals, an undergarment worn without being publicly visible, or nipple of the female breast of another person without that person's consent; or 2. Uses the unaided eye or any device designed to improve visual acuity for the purpose of observing or viewing the sexual conduct, genitals, an undergarment worn without being publicly visible, or nipple of the female breast of another person without that person's consent; or 3.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at apps.legislature.ky.gov
Cited in 9 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Kentucky courts have treated KRS 531.090 largely as a jury-instruction question. Williams v. Commonwealth (2005) held the 2002 voyeurism statute could not reach conduct predating its July 15, 2002 effective date, and Morgan v. Commonwealth (2006) held voyeurism is not a lesser-included offense of first-degree burglary.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Williams v. Commonwealth (Kentucky Supreme Court 2005, 178 S.W.3d 491)✓Williams photographed his eight-year-old stepdaughter naked in January 2001 and sought a lesser-included voyeurism instruction; the court held KRS 531.090 created a new offense effective July 15, 2002 and was not retroactive, so it could not reach his earlier conduct.
- Morgan v. Commonwealth (Kentucky Supreme Court 2006, 189 S.W.3d 99)✓Morgan watched a couple through a trailer window, then cut the phone line and broke in armed; the court held voyeurism under KRS 531.090 is not a lesser-included offense of first-degree burglary because it requires proof of unlawful entry to view another person.
- Commonwealth v. Mixon (Kentucky Supreme Court 1992, 827 S.W.2d 689)“…lier cases, arising under the former habitual criminal act, KRS 531.090, required authenticated records of fore…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Kentucky Recording Laws (2026): One-Party Consent Rules, Kentucky Laws on Recording in Public: Rights, Limits, and Exceptions, Kentucky School Recording Laws: Student, Parent, and Teacher Rights
§ 531.120Distribution of sexually explicit images without consentIn forcecited in 9 of our articles
(1) A person is guilty of distribution of sexually explicit images without consent when: (a) He or she intentionally distributes to any third party private erotic matter without the written consent of the person depicted, and does so with the intent to profit, or to harm, harass, intimidate, threaten, or coerce the person depicted; and (b) The disclosure would cause a reasonable person to suffer harm. (2) This section shall not apply to: (a) Images involving voluntary nudity or sexual conduct in public, commercial settings, or in a place where a person does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy; (b) Disclosures made in the public interest, including the reporting of unlawful conduct, or lawful and common practices of law enforcement, criminal reporting, corrections, legal proceedings, or medical treatment; (c) Disclosures of materials that constitute a matter of public concern; or (d) Internet service providers or telecommunications services, or interactive computer services, as defined in 47 U.S.C. sec. 230(f)(2), for content solely provided by another person.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at apps.legislature.ky.gov
Also relied on in: Kentucky Sexting Laws: Legal Consequences and Penalties, Revenge Porn Laws by State: All 50 States and DC (2026), Kentucky Pornography Laws (2026): Obscenity and Age Verification
§ 531.300Definitions for KRS 531.080 and 531.300 to 531.370In forcecited in 3 of our articles
As used in KRS 531.080 and 531.300 to 531.370: (1) "Obscene" means the predominate appeal of the matter taken as a whole is to a prurient interest in sexual conduct involving minors; (2) "Performance" means any play, motion picture, photograph, dance, or any other visual representation or computer-generated image exhibited before an audience; (3) "Promote" means to prepare, publish, print, procure, or manufacture, or to offer or agree to do the same; (4) "Sexual conduct by a minor" means: (a) Acts of masturbation, homosexuality, lesbianism, bestiality, sexual intercourse, or deviate sexual intercourse, actual or simulated; (b) Physical contact with, or willful or intentional exhibition of the genitals; (c) Flagellation or excretion for the purpose of sexual stimulation or gratification; or (d) The exposure, in an obscene manner, of the unclothed or apparently unclothed human male or female genitals, pubic area or buttocks, or the female breast, whether or not subsequently obscured by a mark placed thereon, or otherwise altered, in any resulting motion picture, photograph, computer-generated image, or other visual representation, exclusive of exposure portrayed in matter of…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at apps.legislature.ky.gov
Cited in 29 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Payne v. Commonwealth (Kentucky Supreme Court 1981, 623 S.W.2d 867)“…310), as interpreted through its definitional counterpart (KRS 531.300), violates the First and Fourteenth Ame…”
- Purcell v. Commonwealth (Kentucky Supreme Court 2004, 149 S.W.3d 382)“…ionary review. Appellant asserts (1) that subsection (b) of KRS 531.300(4) (definition of "sexual conduct by a…”
- Clark v. Commonwealth (Kentucky Supreme Court 2008, 267 S.W.3d 668)“…In Woodard v. Commonwealth, we recognized that KRS 531.300(5) defined performance (within the cont…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Kentucky AI Laws and Regulation (2026)
Kentucky Revised Statutes, Chapter 117: REGULATION OF ELECTIONS
§ 117.322Action against use of synthetic media in electioneering communication -- Remedies -- Penalties -- Defense -- ExceptionsIn forcecited in 10 of our articles
(1) (a) Any candidate for any elected office whose appearance, action, or speech is altered through the use of synthetic media in an electioneering communication may seek injunctive or other equitable relief against the sponsor of the electioneering communication requiring that the communication includes a disclosure that is clear and conspicuous and included in, or alongside and associated with, the content in a manner that is likely to be noticed by the user. (b) The court may award a prevailing party reasonable attorney's fees and costs. This paragraph does not limit or preclude a plaintiff from securing or recovering any other available remedy. (2) In any action brought under subsection (1) of this section: (a) The plaintiff shall: 1. File in Circuit Court of the county in which he or she resides; and 2. Bear the burden of establishing the use of synthetic media by clear and convincing evidence; and (b) The following shall not be liable except as provided in subsection (3) of this section: 1. The medium disseminating the electioneering communication; and 2. An advertising sales representative of such medium.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-09 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at apps.legislature.ky.gov
Also relied on in: Kentucky Deepfake Laws: AI Images, Voice Cloning & Penalties (2026), Deepfake & AI Voice Cloning Laws by State (2026), Kentucky Video Recording Laws: Surveillance, Privacy, and Legal Limits
Kentucky Revised Statutes, Chapter 456: CIVIL ORDERS OF PROTECTION
§ 456.060Ruling on petition for interpersonal protective order -- Duration of orderIn forcecited in 3 of our articles
(1) Following a hearing ordered under KRS 456.040, if a court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that dating violence and abuse, sexual assault, or stalking has occurred and may again occur, the court may issue an interpersonal protective order: (a) Restraining the adverse party from: 1. Committing further acts of dating violence and abuse, stalking, or sexual assault; 2. Any unauthorized contact or communication with the petitioner or other person specified by the court; 3. Approaching the petitioner or other person specified by the court within a distance specified in the order, not to exceed five hundred (500) feet; 4. Going to or within a specified distance of a specifically described residence, school, or place of employment or area where such a place is located; and 5. Disposing of or damaging any of the property of the parties; (b) Authorizing, at the request of the petitioner: 1. Limited contact or communication between the parties that the court finds necessary; or 2. The parties to remain in a common area, which may necessitate them being closer than five hundred (500) feet under limited circumstances with specific parameters set forth by the court.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at apps.legislature.ky.gov
Cited in 24 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Halloway v. Simmons (Court of Appeals of Kentucky 2017, 532 S.W.3d 158)“…ur, the court may issue an interpersonal protective order.” KRS 456.060(1). Under KRS 456.010(7), “ ‘[sjtalking…”
- Calhoun v. Wood (Court of Appeals of Kentucky 2017, 516 S.W.3d 357)“…ry to restrain Calhoun from further acts of stalking. See KRS 456.060(1). Based on our analysis of the proc…”
- Benson v. Lively (Court of Appeals of Kentucky 2018, 544 S.W.3d 159)“…However, similar to the DVO statute, the IPO statute, KRS 456.060, does allow a trial court to direct or…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Kentucky Security Camera Laws: Home, Business, and HOA Rules, Kentucky Audio Recording Laws: One-Party Consent Rules and Penalties
Kentucky Revised Statutes, Chapter 508: ASSAULT AND RELATED OFFENSES
§ 508.130StalkingIn forcecited in 3 of our articles
(1) As used in this section, unless the context requires otherwise: (a) 1. "Course of conduct" means a pattern of conduct composed of two (2) or more acts, evidencing a continuity of purpose. 2. One (1) or more of these acts may include: a. Those by which a person, directly or indirectly, by any means or method: i. Follows, monitors, observes, surveils, or threatens another person; or ii. Interferes with another person's property; or b. The use of any equipment, instrument, machine, or other device by which communication or information is transmitted, including but not limited to: i. Computers; ii. The internet, internet applications, social media platforms, email, text messages, instant messages, or any other electronic network; iii. Cameras or other recording devices; iv. Telephones or other personal communications devices; v. Scanners or other copying devices; and vi. Any device that enables the use of a transmitting device. 3.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at apps.legislature.ky.gov
Cited in 34 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Morgan v. Commonwealth (Kentucky Supreme Court 2006, 189 S.W.3d 99)“…Physical injury; or 3. Death. "Stalking" is defined in KRS 508.130(1) as follows: (a) To "stalk" means t…”
- Halloway v. Simmons (Court of Appeals of Kentucky 2017, 532 S.W.3d 158)“…sical injury; or 3. Death There, stalking is defined in KRS 508.130 as meaning, (1) (a) To engage in an i…”
- Calhoun v. Wood (Court of Appeals of Kentucky 2017, 516 S.W.3d 357)“…(2) or more acts, evidencing a continuity of purpose .... KRS 508.130. In the circuit court, Wood alleged t…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Kentucky Surveillance Camera Laws (2026 Guide)
§ 508.140Repealed, 2026.Repealedcited in 2 of our articles
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at apps.legislature.ky.gov
Cited in 27 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Calhoun v. Wood (Court of Appeals of Kentucky 2017, 516 S.W.3d 357)“…[sjtalking’ refers to conduct prohibited as stalking under KRS 508.140 or [KRS] 508.150.” KRS 456.010(7). Thos…”
- Monhollen v. Commonwealth (Court of Appeals of Kentucky 1997, 947 S.W.2d 61)“…to an overbreadth challenge”). The stalking statute, KRS 508.140, provides: (1) A person is guilt…”
- Halloway v. Simmons (Court of Appeals of Kentucky 2017, 532 S.W.3d 158)“…[sjtalking’ refers to conduct prohibited as stalking under KRS 508.140 or 508.150.” Stalking in the second deg…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Kentucky GPS Tracking Laws: Is It Legal to Put a Tracker on a Car? (2026)
§ 508.150Repealed, 2026.Repealedcited in 2 of our articles
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at apps.legislature.ky.gov
Cited in 32 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Calhoun v. Wood (Court of Appeals of Kentucky 2017, 516 S.W.3d 357)“…ined in KRS 510.010; 2. Physical injury; or 3. Death. KRS 508.150(1). The term “stalk” as used in this st…”
- Duncan v. Commonwealth (Kentucky Supreme Court 2010, 322 S.W.3d 81)“…nd of two counts of second-degree stalking, in violation of KRS 508.150. In accord with the jury’s status deter…”
- Morgan v. Commonwealth (Kentucky Supreme Court 2006, 189 S.W.3d 99)“…failed to prove the elements of the offense as set forth in KRS 508.150, which provides: (1) A person is guil…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Kentucky Revised Statutes, Chapter 526: EAVESDROPPING AND RELATED OFFENSES
§ 526.020EavesdroppingIn forcecited in 20 of our articles
(1) A person is guilty of eavesdropping when he intentionally uses any device to eavesdrop, whether or not he is present at the time. (2) Eavesdropping is a Class D felony.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at apps.legislature.ky.gov
Cited in 8 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2023
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Basham v. Commonwealth (1984) held wiretap evidence obtained under a valid federal order is admissible in Kentucky, though it noted no state law authorizes electronic surveillance by Kentucky police. Brock v. Commonwealth (1997) held the exclusionary rule reaches only constitutional violations, so a private recording was not suppressed.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Springer v. Commonwealth (Kentucky Supreme Court 1999, 998 S.W.2d 439)✓A neighbor used a police scanner to tape cordless calls from the victim's home, and detectives played it to induce Eades to confess; the court held the federal wiretap act and Kentucky's eavesdropping statutes did not bar using it against someone who was not a party to the calls.
- Stringer v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (Kentucky Supreme Court 2004, 151 S.W.3d 781)✓Wal-Mart secretly ran about forty hours of audio and video surveillance of employees in a store claims area; the court did not decide whether that violated KRS 526.020, holding instead that the employees' statutory claim failed for lack of damages caused by the recording itself.
- Brock v. Commonwealth (Kentucky Supreme Court 1997, 947 S.W.2d 24)✓Brock, claiming self-defense, was kept from using a private tape of the victim's mother saying her son had gone to kill him; the court held that even assuming the tape violated KRS 526.020, the exclusionary rule reaches only state action, so suppression was not required.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Kentucky Dashcam Laws: Legality, Mounting Rules, and Evidence Use, Kentucky Landlord-Tenant Recording Laws: Surveillance, Privacy, and Disputes, Kentucky Phone Call Recording Laws: What You Need to Know
§ 526.080ForfeitureIn forcecited in 6 of our articles
Any electronic, mechanical or other device designed or commonly used for eavesdropping which is possessed or used in violation of this chapter, is forfeited to the state and shall be disposed of in accordance with KRS 500.090.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at apps.legislature.ky.gov
Also relied on in: Kentucky Workplace Recording Laws: Employee and Employer Rights, Kentucky AI Meeting Recording Laws (2026)
United States Code Title 18
§ 2251Sexual exploitation of childrenIn forcecited in 7 of our articles
Any person who employs, uses, persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any minor to engage in, or who has a minor assist any other person to engage in, or who transports any minor in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, or in any Territory or Possession of the United States, with the intent that such minor engage in, any sexually explicit conduct for the purpose of producing any visual depiction of such conduct or for the purpose of transmitting a live visual depiction of such conduct, shall be punished as provided under subsection (e), if such person knows or has reason to know that such visual depiction will be transported or transmitted using any means or facility of interstate or foreign commerce or in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce or mailed, if that visual depiction was produced or transmitted using materials that have been mailed, shipped, or transported in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce by any means, including by computer, or if such visual depiction has actually been transported or transmitted using any means or facility of interstate or foreign commerce or in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce or mailed.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 2,812 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- United States v. Irey (Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit 2010, 612 F.3d 1160)“…iled on December 13, 2006, Irey was charged with violating 18 U.S.C. § 2251 (c). The indictment alleged that he “di…”
- Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition (Supreme Court of the United States 2002, 535 U.S. 234)“…ether the Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996 (CPPA), 18 U. S. C. § 2251 et seq., abridges the freedom of sp…”
- United States v. X-Citement Video, Inc. (Supreme Court of the United States 1994, 513 U.S. 64)“…But as in the criminalization of pornography production at 18 U. S. C. § 2251 , see infra, at 76, n. 5, the perpetr…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Delaware Voyeurism Laws: Hidden Cameras, Penalties, and Privacy Protections (2026), Montana Sexting Laws: Legal Consequences and Penalties, Federal Sexting Laws: Legal Consequences and Penalties
§ 2252Certain activities relating to material involving the sexual exploitation of minorsIn forcecited in 7 of our articles
Any person who— knowingly transports or ships using any means or facility of interstate or foreign commerce or in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce by any means including by computer or mails, any visual depiction, if— the producing of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and such visual depiction is of such conduct; knowingly receives, or distributes, any visual depiction using any means or facility of interstate or foreign commerce or that has been mailed, or has been shipped or transported in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, or which contains materials which have been mailed or so shipped or transported, by any means including by computer, or knowingly reproduces any visual depiction for distribution using any means or facility of interstate or foreign commerce or in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce or through the mails, if— the producing of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and such visual depiction is of such conduct; either— in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or on any land or building owned by,…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 3,732 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- New York v. Ferber (Supreme Court of the United States 1982, 458 U.S. 747)“…o prohibits dissemination only if the material is obscene. 18 U. S. C. § 2252 (a) (1976 ed., Supp. IV). Two States pr…”
- United States v. X-Citement Video, Inc. (Supreme Court of the United States 1994, 513 U.S. 64)“…depictions of minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct. 18 U. S. C. § 2252 . The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Ci…”
- Osborne v. Ohio (Supreme Court of the United States 1990, 495 U.S. 103)“…rial for the purpose of sale or distribution for sale. See 18 U. S. C. § 2252 (a) (1982 ed.). But Congress did not…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Alabama Voyeurism Laws: Hidden Cameras, Penalties, and Victim Rights, Nevada Voyeurism and Hidden Camera Laws: NRS 200.604 Penalties (2026), Wisconsin Voyeurism and Hidden Camera Laws: Privacy Crimes and Penalties (2026)
§ 2520Recovery of civil damages authorizedIn forcecited in 115 of our articles
Except as provided in section 2511(2)(a)(ii), any person whose wire, oral, or electronic communication is intercepted, disclosed, or intentionally used in violation of this chapter may in a civil action recover from the person or entity, other than the United States, which engaged in that violation such relief as may be appropriate. In an action under this section, appropriate relief includes— such preliminary and other equitable or declaratory relief as may be appropriate; damages under subsection (c) and punitive damages in appropriate cases; and a reasonable attorney’s fee and other litigation costs reasonably incurred.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 860 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Walker v. Darby (1990) held a 2520 plaintiff need not prove the contents of intercepted conversations, only interception and a justified expectation against it. Bartnicki v. Vopper (2001) barred 2520 damages against defendants who took no part in the interception, obtained the tape lawfully, and disclosed a matter of public concern.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Jessie Walker v. Thomas E. Darby, Hugh L. Robinson, Jr., and Kenneth Day (Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit 1990, 911 F.2d 1573)✓A postal letter carrier said three supervisors wired an intercom near his workstation to listen in. Reversing summary judgment, the Eleventh Circuit held a section 2520 plaintiff can show interception without proving the contents of specific conversations.
- Gelbard v. United States (Supreme Court of the United States 1972, 408 U.S. 41)“…disclosure, or use is entitled to recover civil damages, 18 U. S. C. § 2520 . Title III also bars the use as eviden…”
- DirecTV, Inc. v. Hoa Huynh (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2007, 503 F.3d 847)“…7 U.S.C. § 605 (e)(4), or alternatively, for violations of 18 U.S.C. § 2520 (a), or alternatively, for violations o…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: US Recording Laws by State (2026): All 50 States Explained, One-Party Consent States: Complete 2026 Guide, Alabama Audio Recording Laws: Consent Rules and Penalties
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- KRS 531.090 - Voyeurism(apps.legislature.ky.gov).gov
- KRS 531.120 - Nonconsensual Distribution of Sexually Explicit Images(apps.legislature.ky.gov).gov
- KRS 526.020 - Eavesdropping(apps.legislature.ky.gov).gov
- KRS 508.130 - Stalking (consolidated statute, eff. July 15, 2026)(apps.legislature.ky.gov).gov
- KRS 456.060 - Interpersonal Protective Orders(apps.legislature.ky.gov).gov
- Kentucky Attorney General(ag.ky.gov).gov
- Kentucky State Police Sex Offender Registry(kspsor.state.ky.us).gov
- 18 U.S.C. 2251 - Sexual Exploitation of Children(law.cornell.edu)
- KRS Chapter 531 - Pornography (Child Exploitation Sections 531.300-531.370)(apps.legislature.ky.gov).gov
- KRS 117.322 - Synthetic Media in Elections(apps.legislature.ky.gov).gov