AI Recorders at Work: Did Everyone Agree to Be Recorded?

I recently saw an advertisement for an AI recording device marketed to students for taking notes in class. It got me thinking about what that means in states that require everyone’s consent to record a conversation. Then I realized the same question applies in your business.

The same kind of device, and the AI note-taker that joins a Teams or Zoom call, is now in conference rooms, sales calls and one-on-ones. It records, transcribes and summarizes, often in someone else’s cloud. Often, nobody asks the other people in the room.

What the law says, in plain terms

Federal law allows a person to record a conversation they are part of: the federal wiretap statute makes it lawful where the person is a party to the communication or one party has given prior consent, unless the recording is for a criminal or harmful purpose.

Many states go further. According to the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, about 11 states primarily require the consent of everyone in the conversation: California, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan (at least for recordings by someone outside the conversation), Montana, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Washington. Four more require everyone’s consent for either in-person conversations or phone calls, but not both. The details vary from state to state.

Video calls make this harder, because one meeting can include people in several states. When the states differ, the Reporters Committee advises journalists to assume the stricter law applies, and notes that courts differ on which state’s law governs. That is sensible caution for a business too.

None of this is legal advice. Which law applies to a particular recording is a question for your attorney.

The note-taker companies put the burden on your people

This is not only theoretical. In August 2025, a federal lawsuit seeking class-action status accused Otter.ai, a popular AI transcription service, of recording conversations without permission from the people in them and using them to train its AI. NPR reported that the service, by default, does not ask meeting attendees for permission to record, according to the suit.

According to LegalTech Digest, Otter’s privacy policy tells its users to “make sure you have the necessary permissions” before recording, and on August 17, 2026, the court dismissed some claims but allowed key privacy claims to proceed. The case has not been decided.

The lesson for an employer is in that policy line. Recording tools generally make the person pressing record responsible for consent. When that person is your employee, on a company call, the question of who is responsible can quickly include your company.

Where this creates risk for a business

Customer and vendor calls. A sales rep’s note-taker records a prospect in a state that requires everyone’s consent, without telling them. Even setting the law aside, discovering the recording later damages trust.

Confidential information leaving the building. A consumer recording app sends audio and transcripts to its own cloud. Pricing, contract terms, product plans and customer data now sit with a company you have no agreement with, under terms that may let it keep or reuse the data.

HR and investigations. Performance conversations, complaints and investigations are exactly the meetings someone may want on record, and exactly the ones where a secret recording causes the most harm. Decide in advance how these are handled.

Legal and board discussions. Conversations with your attorney, and sensitive leadership discussions, are not places for third-party recorders. Ask your attorney how recording could affect the protections those conversations normally have.

Records you did not know you had. A recording or transcript of a business conversation may be a business record. If it lives on an employee’s personal account, you cannot find it, retain it or delete it when you need to.

A simple recording policy

A policy does not need to be long. It should answer five questions.

1. When is recording allowed? For example: internal training sessions and meetings where everyone has agreed. Never: HR matters, legal discussions or board sessions, unless approved in advance.
2. How are people told? Announce at the start of every recorded meeting and get agreement before recording. Do not rely on a small indicator icon.
3. Which tools are approved? Use company-managed tools with settings you control, such as where data is stored, how long it is kept and whether it may be used to train AI. Ban personal recorders and personal note-taker accounts for company business.
4. Who can see the recordings, and for how long? Set a retention period, store recordings with other company records, and delete them on schedule.
5. What about customers and outside parties? Require their consent, every time, and record that you asked.

Then tell people. Most employees using these tools are trying to be more productive, not to break rules. A short explanation and an approved alternative usually solve the problem.

Questions to ask this month

• Do we know which AI note-takers and recording devices our people already use?
• Do we have employees, customers or partners in states that require everyone’s consent?
• Where do recordings and transcripts from those tools go, and who controls them?
• Can the vendor use our recordings to train its AI, and have we turned that off?
• Which meetings should never be recorded without explicit approval?
• Has our attorney reviewed our approach for the states we operate in?

If you would like help taking stock of the tools in use and putting a practical policy in place, get in touch.