Utah Code

Utah Code § 13-10-8 (2026)

Failure to disclose the origin of a recording -- Penalty

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section UT-LEGle.utah.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

For purposes of this section "recording" means:

a tangible medium on which sounds or images are recorded or otherwise stored, including an original phonograph record, disc, tape, audio or video cassette, wire, film, or other similar medium; or

a copy or reproduction that duplicates the original in whole or in part.

A person is guilty of failure to disclose the origin of a recording if:

the person commits any of the following acts for commercial advantage or private financial gain:

offers a recording for sale, resale, or rent;

sells, resells, rents, leases, or lends a recording; or

possesses a recording for any of the purposes described in Subsection (2)(a)(i) or (ii); and

the person knows that the recording does not contain the true name and address of the manufacturer in a prominent place on its cover, jacket, or label.

A person who fails to disclose the origin of a recording under Subsection (2) is guilty of:

a felony of the third degree if the offense involves 100 or more recordings, or the commercial equivalent of 100 or more recordings, during a 180-day period or if the person has previously been convicted of a violation of this section;

a class A misdemeanor if the offense involves at least 10 recordings and fewer than 100 recordings, or the commercial equivalent of at least 10 recordings and fewer than 100 recordings, during a 180-day period; or

a class B misdemeanor if the offense involves fewer than 10 recordings or fewer than the commercial equivalent of 10 recordings.

In addition to the penalties provided in Subsection (3), a court may order a person who commits a violation of Subsection (2) to forfeit any recordings in the person's possession that served as the basis for the violation of Subsection (2).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 2006–2006 · leading case: McLaughlin v. Commonwealth, 629 S.E.2d 724 (Va. Ct. App. 2006).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

McLaughlin v. Commonwealth, 629 S.E.2d 724 (Va. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 2× “35 (Consol.2005); N.C. Gen.Stat. § 14-435 (2005); N.”

Carmas (Carmus) Jonah McLaughlin v. Commonwealth (Va. Ct. App. 2006). “94 (2005); Utah Code Ann. § 13-10-8 (2006); Wash. Rev.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.