Short answer first: it depends on your university, and six of the eight tell you. The University of Auckland, Victoria University of Wellington, Canterbury and Otago require the lecturer's permission for a personal recording. Massey says staff will consent to a reasonable request. AUT says you may record audio without asking. Waikato and Lincoln publish no rule we could find. Five of the six rules limit you to your own study, no copies and no sharing, and Victoria, AUT and Massey add deletion when you are done. The Crimes Act 1961 punishes intercepting a private communication, except by a party to it, and does not say whether a lecture is one.
Where the answer is yes, a laptop and a recording app do the rest, and this comparison of apps for recording lectures includes Notibo, which returns a transcript and notes and gives you Pro free for 14 days, no card.
This article is about you pressing record on your own phone. The university's own recordings have their own rules, covered in lecture capture at New Zealand universities. We read the policy of every university that publishes one, the three Acts underneath, and the disability pages that give a second route when the first is closed.
Who decides whether you may record a lecture?
The university does, through its own policy or its student conduct rules, and the eight are not aligned. No statute says students may or may not record a lecture; the law sets a floor on interception, privacy and copyright, and the universities build on it. We looked for a published rule at all eight, in the policy hub, the student conduct statute, the lecture recording policy and the accessibility pages. Six have one.
| University | Rule and its date | Permission needed? | What a yes covers |
|---|---|---|---|
| University of Auckland (Waipapa Taumata Rau) | Recording of Taught Content Policy and Procedures, item 23 | Yes, from the teacher | Not stated beyond the permission; the copyright page for students warns of legal action for recording without it |
| AUT | Recording of Lectures and Seminars Policy, issued 1 January 2014 | No, for audio; visual recording via Disability Student Support | Sole use by the enrolled student, no copies, no distribution, destroy once the purpose is met, discreet device |
| University of Waikato | None found | Not published | Not published |
| Massey University (Te Kunenga ki Pūrehuroa) | Recording of Scholarly Work and Student Work Framework, last reviewed February 2015 | Staff will consent to a reasonable request: solely for study, a valid reason, no significant disruption | Research or private study only, not redistributed; stop if staff consider it intrusive |
| Victoria University of Wellington (Te Herenga Waka) | Recording by Students of Lectures and other Teaching Policy, effective 1 October 2014 | Yes, from the individual lecturer, withheld only for good reason | Audio, for your own review of that class, no copies or alteration, stop if directed, delete when no longer required |
| University of Canterbury | Lecture Recording Policy, clause 7.4, created April 2024 | Yes, explicit permission from the staff member | Private study or research only; no sharing or publishing in whole or in part |
| Lincoln University | None found | Not published | Not published |
| University of Otago (Ōtākou Whakaihu Waka) | Recording of Lectures Policy, approved by Senate 3 December 2025, in effect from 20 February 2026 | Yes, from the lecturer | Private study or research only; misuse is misconduct |
- AUT is the outlier. Its policy says any student is permitted to use a recording device to make an audio recording of a lecture or seminar and is not required to seek permission. Issued on 1 January 2014 with a review date of 2020, it is still the policy in the hub.
- Waikato and Lincoln publish nothing we could find. Waikato's policy list has no recording policy, and its Code of Student Conduct and Students with Disabilities and Impairments Policy do not mention recording. Lincoln's policy library holds 184 documents and none is about lecture recording; its Learning and Teaching Policy and its Student Discipline Regulations do not mention it either.
At Waikato or Lincoln, ask, because no page will do it for you. At the other six, the policy is both your answer and your protection: a lecturer at Victoria who refuses must have a good reason, and a student at AUT recording audio quietly is inside the rules.
How do you ask, and what does a yes cover?
Ask once, early, in writing, for the whole course. Canterbury's accessibility page asks students who use its approved transcription tool to inform lecturers before the start of the term. A message in week one gives the lecturer time to say which sessions are out of bounds, and gives you a record that you asked.
- Say what you will record and what you will do with it. Five of the six rules limit the recording to your own study, no copies and no sharing, and three add deletion, so promise all four up front: your own study of this course, no copies, no sharing, and deletion when the course ends. Victoria's policy has the student undertake to delete the recording when it is no longer required; AUT's says recordings must be destroyed once the purpose is met, normally at the end of the course; Massey's framework has students destroy any recorded material they hold when the course ends.
- Expect audio, not video. Victoria allows video only in exceptional circumstances and then only of the presenter and the screen, unless every other student and staff member has individually consented. AUT's permission-free rule is for audio.
- Accept the stop. Victoria's policy lets the staff member direct that recording cease where it is obstructive, intrusive or may breach another student's privacy. AUT's procedures let staff refuse where a recording would breach a third party's privacy, data protection or copyright, or where the Chatham House Rule is expressly invoked.
- Keep the device discreet. AUT's policy requires the recording method to be discreet and not obstructive to other participants, and Massey's asks for no significant disruption to the class.
What to write to the lecturer
Three sentences do it. Name the course and say you would like to audio record the lectures for your own revision. Say you will not share or copy the recording and will delete it at the end of the semester. Ask whether any sessions should not be recorded. If your university's policy is one of the six above, name it. Keep the reply; a written yes is easier to rely on in week ten.
What does the Crimes Act 1961 say about recording?
Students ask this because they have heard the phrase "single-party consent", and Canterbury's own covert recording page uses it: in New Zealand, it says, it is generally not illegal to record a meeting you are a part of, even if others are unaware, as long as you are a party to the conversation, and then it says it is not appropriate to record people without informing them. The Act is narrower and more careful than the phrase.
- The offence is intercepting a private communication with a device. Section 216B(1) of the Crimes Act 1961 makes everyone liable to imprisonment for up to two years who intentionally intercepts any private communication by means of an interception device. Section 216A says intercept includes record, and defines an interception device as any electronic, mechanical or other device used or capable of being used to intercept a private communication.
- A party to the communication is outside the offence. Section 216B(2)(a) says subsection (1) does not apply where the person intercepting is a party to that private communication. Section 216A(3) defines a party as any originator of the communication and any person the originator intended to receive it, and anyone who intercepts it with the express or implied consent of one of them.
- Private communication has a two-part definition. Under section 216A it means a communication made under circumstances that may reasonably be taken to indicate that any party desires it to be confined to the parties, but not one made where any party ought reasonably to expect it may be intercepted by someone without consent. The Act does not say where a lecture to 300 students sits on that line, and neither does any university page we read.
- Disclosing an unlawful interception is its own offence. Section 216C makes it an offence, again with up to two years, to intentionally disclose a private communication, or its substance, knowing it was intercepted in breach of section 216B.
What this means is narrower than the folklore. The Act defines a party as a person the originator intended to receive the communication, and it leaves open whether that describes a student in a lecture theatre and whether a lecture is a private communication at all. The university's rule governs either way: AUT, Victoria and Otago name the disciplinary statute a breach falls under, and Auckland's copyright page says recording without permission can bring disciplinary action.
What do the Privacy Act and the Copyright Act add?
Two more Acts touch a recording made in a lecture theatre. The Privacy Act 2020 reaches the voices of other students on it. The Copyright Act 1994 reaches the lecture itself and the slides on the screen. Neither has a rule written for a student's recording of a lecture, and both shape what you may do with one afterwards.
- The Privacy Act mostly steps back for personal study. Section 27 of the Privacy Act 2020 says the collection principles do not apply to an individual collecting personal information solely for their personal or domestic affairs, and the storage, use and disclosure principles do not apply to an individual holding it for that purpose where it was collected lawfully or created by them. Section 27(3) withdraws the exemption where the collection, use or disclosure would be highly offensive to a reasonable person. What happens when you upload the recording to an app is in student data privacy in New Zealand.
- A lecture is a literary work, and copyright in it exists once it is recorded, by anyone. Section 2 of the Copyright Act 1994 defines a literary work as any work, other than a dramatic or musical work, that is written, spoken or sung, and its definition of performance speaks of a literary work that is a lecture. Section 15 says copyright does not exist in a literary work until it is recorded, and that it is immaterial whether it is recorded by or with the consent of the author. Section 16 gives the owner the exclusive right to copy it and to communicate it to the public.
- Fair dealing for research or private study is the exception the Act offers. Section 43 says fair dealing with a work for the purposes of research or private study does not infringe copyright, and lists what a court weighs, including the effect on the market for the work. Section 43(4) adds that it does not authorise more than one copy of the same work on any one occasion.
Who owns the lecture
Section 21 of the Copyright Act makes the author the first owner, and the employer the first owner of a work an employee makes in the course of employment, subject to any agreement to the contrary. The universities say where they have landed. Otago's policy says the lecturer owns the copyright for instructional material they produce for the lecture; Canterbury's says recordings are the intellectual property of the staff member, with a licence to the university; AUT's says ownership of the information in a recording never passes to the student; Massey's framework says staff and students own the copyright in recordings they make, but no other intellectual property rights. None of the rules gives you any ownership of the lecture's content, and each of them, or in Auckland's case its copyright page, bars passing the recording on.
What if you have a disability?
Then the question changes from "may I" to "what adjustment do I need", and it goes to a service rather than a lecturer. Section 21(1)(h) of the Human Rights Act 1993 lists disability as a prohibited ground of discrimination, including physical impairment, psychiatric illness and intellectual or psychological impairment. Section 57 makes it unlawful for an educational establishment, or anyone teaching at one, to deny or restrict access to any benefits or services it provides by reason of a prohibited ground. Section 60 carves out a disability whose required services or facilities cannot reasonably be made available. The adjustment itself is decided by the university's own service, and the pages below differ in whether they mention recording at all.
| University | Service named on its pages | What the pages say about recording |
|---|---|---|
| University of Auckland | Student Disability Services (Ratonga Hauātanga Tauira) or Inclusive Learning; reasonable accommodations | Teachers are encouraged to be guided by the service's advice on individual students; the inclusive teaching guidelines ask for audience microphones so recordings capture every voice |
| AUT | Disability Student Support | An eligible student can ask the university to make a visual recording; recordings may be passed to a disability advisor for transcription |
| University of Waikato | Accessibility Services; reasonable accommodations under the Students with Disabilities and Impairments Policy | The policy does not mention recording, and its appendix of example accommodations lists a notetaker and speech-to-text software; accommodations are agreed between the student, the service and the staff involved |
| Massey University | Disability Services; a documented disability | A request to record may be made by an appointed delegate on the student's behalf |
| Victoria University of Wellington | Te Amaru Disability Services | The student recording policy says that for some students, for example students with disabilities, recording is essential to their learning |
| University of Canterbury | Student Accessibility Service; learning support plan | Clause 7.5: a student whose plan requires lecture recordings must notify the lecturers so adjustments can be made; Otter.ai is approved only for students registered with the service |
| Lincoln University | Inclusive Education and Disability Support | Support is tailored to the individual; recording is not mentioned |
| University of Otago | Disability Information and Support; disability support plan | The recording guidelines say recordings support students with vision impairments, dyslexia, autism spectrum disorders and anxiety, and ask students with a support plan to discuss it with the lecturer |
Two of these deserve a closer look. Canterbury's accessibility page on transcription tools says the university has approved Otter.ai only for students registered with the Student Accessibility Service, that lecturers may still say no to it, and that students agree in training to delete transcriptions within three weeks. AUT's policy has the Disability Office give eligible students an authorisation document to place beside the recording device.
What about tutorials, labs and placements?
Most of the published rules are written for lectures and say so. Otago's policy defines a lecture as a university-authorised oral and visual presentation without significant student participation, and says in terms that it is not a laboratory, placement, lectorial, seminar, tutorial or workshop. AUT's rule names lectures and seminars. Canterbury's clause 7.4 speaks of a lecture, and its approval of Otter.ai is limited to lectures and not to any other activity of the course. Victoria's policy covers lectures and other teaching, and Massey's framework any learning experience, on the same conditions.
- A small room changes who is speaking. In a tutorial the recording is mostly other students, which is the case Victoria's stop condition, that recording may breach the personal privacy of one or more students, describes. Its video clause requires the consent of every other student and staff member, which in a tutorial means everyone at the table. Ask the tutor and the group, not only the lecturer.
- Labs have their own reason to say no. Canterbury's policy lists laboratories among the classes the university does not need to record, and Auckland's inclusive teaching guidelines ask for risk assessments for students in labs. A lab notebook, not a recording, is the record a science course wants, and how to keep one is in notes in lectures, tutorials, labs and placements.
- Placements are not lectures, and nobody there consented. Canterbury's transcription page says it is imperative to gain all participants' consent when recording and transcribing audio, and to record that consent. On a clinical, classroom or social work placement the participants are patients, pupils and clients. No policy we read gives a student permission to record there. Do not.
What do you do when the answer is no?
First find out why, because the reason often points at the alternative. A lecturer who refuses because of a guest speaker, a case study or a copyright problem is describing one session, not the course. A refusal that turns on a disability need belongs with the service above, not the lecturer.
- Ask for the reason and whether it covers every lecture. Victoria's policy says permission may only be withheld for good reason; AUT's procedures have staff remind students at the start of a lecture when a device must not be used, which implies a session-by-session decision.
- Use the appeal the policy gives you. At Victoria a student refused permission may appeal to the Head of School. At AUT an appeal goes to the Dean of the Faculty. Neither Canterbury's nor Otago's policy names an appeal route for a refused personal recording.
- Check whether the university is recording anyway. Four of the eight, Auckland, Victoria, Canterbury and Otago, record lectures in equipped rooms by default and release them through the course site, and Massey says learning experiences are regularly recorded. A refusal of your recording is not a refusal of theirs.
- Ask for the slides, the notes or a written summary. Canterbury's covert recording page says there should usually be no need to record a meeting because you can request a written summary afterwards, and the same request works for a lecture.
What may you do with a recording afterwards?
Less than you would like, and the five rules that go beyond the permission agree almost word for word. The recording is for your own study of that course. It is not to be copied, altered, sold, posted or handed to a friend who missed the lecture. Three of them say it is to be deleted when its purpose is met. The consequences are written down: AUT investigates under the Council Disciplinary Statute, Victoria under the Student Conduct Statute, Otago under the Student Conduct Statute or the Academic Statute, and Auckland warns of copyright action.
- Sharing is the line every policy draws. AUT's forbids conveying the recording to any other person except a disability advisor for transcription. Canterbury's says a student may not share, publish or otherwise make a recording available in whole or in part, and extends that to screenshots and photos taken during a lecture. Otago's says students should not further distribute recordings, including excerpts and screenshots, to any other person.
- Uploading it to a tool is a use only one policy anticipated. Canterbury's transcription page is the only university page we found that names a third-party app, and it limits Otter.ai to accessibility students because the tool may use recordings to train its models, which the page says could impinge on the lecturer's intellectual property. Any app you use to transcribe a recording is a place the recording now lives; the questions to ask it are in student data privacy in New Zealand.
- Deletion is a condition, not a courtesy. Victoria's policy has you undertake to delete when the recording is no longer required. AUT's says normally at the end of the course, and Massey's framework says at its completion. Canterbury's accessibility training sets three weeks for transcriptions. Put a date on it.
Where Notibo fits
Notibo is the tool for the day the answer was yes. It records the lecture on your computer, or takes an audio file you already made, and returns a transcript, structured notes and flashcards with spaced repetition. One recording can run up to two hours; long recordings are saved in smaller parts as they run and joined into one transcript. The audio file is deleted from storage as soon as the transcript and notes have been generated. Any copy you keep yourself, and the notes themselves, are still yours to delete when the policy says so.
No bot joins a call and there is no meeting link to paste; you press record on your laptop in the room, or upload the file your phone made, under the permission you obtained. You get Pro free for 14 days, with 240 minutes of recording, and no card is asked for. After those 14 days the free plan gives 30 minutes of recording a month. Pro is 9.99 euro a month or 88.99 euro a year. The lecture recording page has the details.