Article 68 of the Supreme People's Court's Provisions on Several Issues Concerning Evidence in Civil Proceedings stipulates that evidence obtained by infringing upon the lawful rights and interests of others or violating the prohibitive provisions of laws cannot be used as the basis for ascertaining the facts of a case. According to the provisions of this clause, it is not necessary to obtain the consent of the other party to use the recorded materials as valid evidence. As long as the obtained evidence does not infringe upon the legitimate rights and interests of others, does not violate the law, and is verified, the recorded materials can be used as valid evidence.
Article 69 of the Supreme People's Court's "Provisions on Evidence in Civil Proceedings" stipulates that questionable audio-visual materials cannot be used as the basis for determining the facts of a case alone. In order to have legal effect, the recorded evidence must meet the following three conditions: First, the recorded evidence produced by the parties has not been cut, edited or forged, and it is closely connected, and its content has not been tampered with, with objective authenticity and consistency. Second, the acquisition of recorded evidence must comply with the law. Recording evidence holders who use methods that infringe on others' privacy or violate the prohibition of laws, such as eavesdropping in their workplaces or residences, are evidence obtained in violation of the prohibition of laws and cannot be used as litigation evidence. Third, the other party did not refute or the reasons for rebuttal were not established. When the court takes the recorded evidence as the basis for judging a case, it should also examine whether there are doubts about the recorded evidence. If the other party questions the recorded data and provides sufficient evidence to refute it, then the recorded evidence will lose its probative force; If there is not enough evidence to refute it, the court shall confirm the probative force of the recorded evidence.