Is AI Note Taker Legal? Consent Rules for Recording Meetings and Calls

The AI adds a second question: who stores, processes and reuses the recording afterward. A federal court let wiretap and biometric claims against an AI note taker vendor proceed on Aug 13, 2026, and part of the order turns on what the vendor does with recordings. Already have consent and want the notes? Skip to how Comu AI records the room or a call once you have consent.

Are AI note takers legal in the US? One-party and all-party consent

The federal rule is one-party consent. Under 18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(d), it is lawful for a person not acting under color of law to intercept a wire, oral or electronic communication when that person is a party to the communication or when one of the parties has given prior consent. The exception does not apply when the communication is intercepted for the purpose of committing a criminal or tortious act in violation of the Constitution or the laws of the United States or any State. If you are a party to the meeting, the one-party exception covers your own recording of it, unless the recording is made for a criminal or tortious purpose.

Federal law is one layer: the FCC has no rules on recording of telephone conversations by individuals, and some state laws prohibit the practice. Wiretapping is regulated by both federal and state governments and is punishable by criminal sanctions when done illegally. State laws vary on permitting the recording of telephone conversations and on the consent required from the recorded party.

Two state examples show what a stricter rule looks like:

• California. Penal Code § 632 covers a person who, intentionally and without the consent of all parties to a confidential communication, uses an electronic recording device to record it, whether the parties are in the same room or on a telephone. The penalty is a fine of up to $2,500 per violation, imprisonment in county jail for up to one year or in state prison, or both a fine and imprisonment.
• Washington. RCW 9.73.030 covers recording a private communication by telephone or other device, or a private conversation, without first obtaining the consent of all participants.

Does it matter that an AI takes the notes instead of a person?

Section 632 names "an electronic amplifying or recording device." RCW 9.73.030 names recording by "telephone or other device." Section 2511 covers interception of communications. In the Otter.ai case, the court found a plausible claim of interception because the tool allegedly records and processes meetings in real time, as they occur.

In a January 2024 post on AI companies' privacy commitments, FTC Office of Technology staff wrote: "There is no AI exemption from the laws on the books."

So "is it legal to use AI note takers" has the same first answer as "is it legal to record a call": yes with the consent that federal and state recording laws require. The AI changes what happens after the audio is captured.

Are AI notetakers illegal when a bot joins your Zoom or Teams call?

A bot joining a call is a recording method, and the legal question is consent.

A bot is visible. Otter Notetaker cannot join a meeting anonymously. It joins Zoom, Google Meet and Microsoft Teams meetings as a guest participant and is visible in the meeting.

At the pleading stage, a visible Notetaker did not by itself show consent. In *In re Otter.AI Privacy Litigation*, No. 5:25-cv-06911 (N.D. Cal.), a Washington plaintiff alleged that he did not know his meetings were being recorded, transcribed and stored. Otter argued that he consented because he could see the Notetaker in the meeting. Under Washington law, a person is deemed to consent when he knows the messages will be recorded. The court said that even if the Notetaker appeared as another participant, it could not infer at that stage that he knew his communications were being recorded, transcribed and retained by Otter. His claim was dismissed with leave to amend on a different ground: he had not alleged enough facts showing the communications were private.

The Aug 13, 2026 order also denied Otter's motion to dismiss on three claims:

1. Federal Wiretap Act. The party exception does not apply if the interception is made for a criminal or tortious purpose. The plaintiffs alleged that Otter used their conversations without consent to train its machine-learning systems. Otter answered that its purpose was commercial. The court replied that "committing a tort and seeking a profit are not mutually exclusive" and denied the motion to dismiss that claim.
2. California Invasion of Privacy Act. The court applied the rule that a software provider acting only as an extension of the user who deploys it is not a third-party interceptor. It found that the plaintiffs plausibly alleged Otter does more than that, because Otter allegedly retains the conversations and uses them to improve its own models. On those allegations, the court treated Otter as a possible third-party eavesdropper.
3. Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act. The Illinois plaintiffs alleged that Otter captured their voiceprints. The court denied the motion to dismiss the BIPA claims.

The order came on a motion to dismiss, so the court took the plaintiffs' allegations as true for the motion and found them plausible, and did not decide that Otter broke any law. The claims that survived rest on allegations about what Otter does with recordings. The page Do AI note takers train on your recordings? How to opt out covers that question tool by tool.

What is the legal difference between a meeting bot and a recorder on the table?

Otter offers both: Notetaker joins as a guest participant, and the Otter Desktop app records without a bot. No bot joins a Granola meeting, and other participants see no additional attendee. In Granola, recording starts when you click to start, and Granola's help center puts responsibility for obtaining consent on the user. On a phone call with a recorder attached to your phone, the other person does not see the recorder, so a spoken announcement is how they learn of it.

Being known matters in the statutes. California's § 632 defines "person" to exclude an individual known by all parties to a confidential communication to be overhearing or recording it. Washington adds a form of announcement: consent is considered obtained when one party announces to all the others, in any reasonably effective manner, that the conversation is about to be recorded, and, when consent rests on an announcement, the announcement must also be recorded.

For the rules that apply inside a company, including who may bring a bot or a recorder into which meeting, read In-room recorder vs meeting bot: when each is allowed at work.

How do you announce an AI note taker recording?

A clear announcement names the tool, the purpose and how long the recording is kept. In Washington, when consent rests on an announcement, it must also be recorded. Use this sequence:

1. Tell people ahead of time. Put one line in the calendar invite or the email: an AI note taker will record and transcribe the meeting, who receives the transcript, and how long it is kept. The UK Information Commissioner's Office advises telling people, before a recorded online meeting, why you are recording, what you will use it for and how long you will keep it.
2. Say it again when the recording starts. Use a script such as: "Before we start, I'm using an AI note taker to record and transcribe this call so I can take accurate notes. The transcript stays with me and my team. Is that okay with everyone?"
3. Get a yes from each participant. Where all-party consent applies, every person on the call must agree.
4. Repeat it when someone joins late. A late joiner has not heard the announcement.
5. Stop recording if anyone says no. Without that person's consent in an all-party setting, switch to handwritten notes for that conversation.
6. Keep the recording of the announcement. It is your evidence that consent was requested and given.

For an in-person meeting, say the same thing before anyone starts talking. For a phone call, say it in the first sentence.

Is it legal to use AI note takers at work and with clients?

The law sets a minimum. Company policy, client contracts and professional rules sit on top of it and can be stricter. Check them before you record a client or a colleague, because a recording that satisfies one-party consent can still breach a confidentiality clause.

Lawyers. ABA Formal Opinion 512 (July 29, 2024) is a professional ethics opinion, not a statute or court rule. It states that a client's informed consent is required before information relating to the representation is input into a self-learning generative AI tool, because such a tool's output could lead directly or indirectly to disclosure of that information. The opinion adds that merely adding general, boilerplate provisions to engagement letters is not sufficient for informed consent, and that lawyers should read and understand the Terms of Use, privacy policy and related terms of any tool they use. A transcript of a client call sent to an AI summarizer is information relating to a representation going into an AI tool, so lawyers should read the opinion with that use in mind.

UK and EU teams. The UK ICO's guidance advises that you can record video conferencing sessions, including people's images and voices, where you have a valid purpose that cannot be achieved with less intrusive methods, for example taking minutes of meetings, and that you need to record and justify your lawful basis. Under the EU GDPR, a recording of an identifiable person's voice is information relating to an identifiable natural person, which Article 4(1) defines as personal data. Processing it needs one of the lawful bases in Article 6(1), and Article 13 requires the controller to tell people, at the time the data is collected, the purposes and legal basis, the recipients, the storage period and their rights.

Before the first recorded client call. Ask two questions: does your employer's policy allow AI note takers, and does the client's contract restrict recording or third-party processing?

What do AI note takers add to the legal picture?

Retention. GDPR Article 5(1)(e) requires that personal data be kept in a form that permits identification of people for no longer than necessary for the purposes of the processing. Retention periods and deletion controls matter for teams that handle personal data of people in the EU.

Vendor reuse. The Otter order shows plaintiffs turning a vendor's own use of recordings into a wiretap claim. The FTC addresses privacy commitments under consumer-protection law. The FTC's January 2024 staff post states that model-as-a-service companies that fail to abide by their privacy commitments to users and customers may be liable under the laws the FTC enforces. That includes promises not to use customer data for secret purposes such as training or updating models. Commitments count however and wherever they were made, including promotional materials and terms of service. The FTC's February 2024 staff post states that it may be unfair or deceptive for a company to adopt more permissive data practices, such as using data for AI training, and to tell consumers only through a surreptitious, retroactive change to its terms of service or privacy policy.

Voiceprints. As the court's order quotes it, Section 15(b) of the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act, 740 ILCS 14/15, bars a private entity from collecting a biometric identifier unless it first informs the person in writing that it is collecting or storing the identifier, informs the person in writing of the purpose and length of term, and receives a written release. The Otter plaintiffs in Illinois allege that their voiceprints were captured, and their BIPA claims continue. Under the GDPR, biometric data processed to uniquely identify a natural person is a special category of personal data under Article 9, which prohibits that processing unless an exception such as explicit consent applies.

Processor terms. Where a vendor processes personal data on a business's behalf, GDPR Article 28 requires a contract under which the processor handles the data only on documented instructions from the controller and, at the controller's choice, deletes or returns the data at the end of the service.

How do you check an AI note taker's privacy terms before you use it?

Read the vendor's privacy policy, terms of service and security page for answers to these seven points, and keep the answers with your records:

1. Retention. How long are recordings, audio and transcripts stored, and does deleting a recording delete the audio, the transcript and the summary?
2. Training. Is customer audio or transcript data used to train the vendor's models, and where is the opt-out?
3. Model providers. Which third parties process the audio, and are they barred from training on it?
4. Access. Which vendor staff can open a recording, and under what conditions?
5. Notices. Does the tool tell participants it is recording, and can an admin enforce that setting?
6. Location. Where is data stored and processed, and what covers transfers out of the EU or UK?
7. Voice data. Does the tool create voiceprints for speaker labels, and under what consent?

Which AI voice recorders are GDPR and SOC 2 compliant compares compliance claims across devices, and AI note taker: what it is, types and how to choose explains the capture types.

Let Comu AI record the room or a call once you have consent

Comu Action Pro is a physical recorder. It records in-person conversations and phone calls, and the Comu app detects whether a recording is a call or a face-to-face conversation. For a call, the built-in bone-conduction microphone picks up the call when you attach the device to the phone. You hold the record key for 2 seconds to start. The LED stays lit while it records, and the screen shows the recording status. The announcement and the yes from each person are your step.

Comu also works as software only. You can subscribe in the Comu app without buying hardware and upload audio files to be transcribed and summarized.

On the Starter plan that comes with a device, you tap to transcribe and summarize each recording. Premium and Elite do it automatically. Transcripts cover 113 languages.

Comu is GDPR, HIPAA and SOC 2 compliant. Your files are encrypted. Comu does not sell your data to third parties and does not use it to train AI, and you can delete your data at any time. Comu Action Pro costs €179.99 and Comu Note Pro costs €139.99 (checked Nov 6, 2026). Product pages: Comu Action Pro and Comu Note Pro.

Frequently asked questions

Is it illegal to transcribe a meeting?

No. Transcribing a meeting is legal when the recording behind it was made with the consent the law requires where the participants are. Federal law requires one participant's consent. Some states require every participant's: California covers confidential communications and Washington covers private ones.

Do I have to tell people I am using an AI note taker?

It depends on the law that applies. Under federal law a participant who records needs no one else's consent unless the purpose is criminal or tortious, all-party states require everyone's consent, and the UK ICO advises telling people why you are recording, what you will use it for and how long you will keep it.

Is Granola legal to use?

Yes, with the consent the law requires, the same as for any recorder. No bot joins a Granola meeting, recording starts when you click to start, and Granola's help center puts responsibility for obtaining consent on the user.

Has an AI note taker been taken to court?

Yes. In *In re Otter.AI Privacy Litigation*, No. 5:25-cv-06911 (N.D. Cal.), an order dated Aug 13, 2026 denied the motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' federal Wiretap Act, California Invasion of Privacy Act and Illinois BIPA claims, and dismissed some claims with leave to amend. The court decided only that the allegations were sufficient to continue.

Is it legal to use AI note takers in the EU or UK?

Yes. In the EU, the GDPR requires a lawful basis under Article 6(1) and a notice of the purpose, recipients and storage period at the time of collection under Article 13. In the UK, the ICO's guidance gives taking minutes of a meeting as an example of a valid purpose for recording a video conference.

Do lawyers need client consent to use an AI note taker?

ABA Formal Opinion 512, a non-binding ethics opinion, states that the client's informed consent is required before information relating to the representation is input into a self-learning generative AI tool, and general boilerplate in an engagement letter is not sufficient. State bar rules govern lawyers in each state.

Is a bot joining the call the same as getting consent?

Not by itself. In the Otter order, the court could not infer from the Notetaker's presence that the plaintiff knew about the recording. A spoken announcement tells every participant about the recording.

This page is general information, not legal advice.

Related reading

• In-room recorder vs meeting bot: when each is allowed at work: workplace rules for bringing a bot or a recorder into a meeting.
• Do AI note takers train on your recordings? How to opt out: the training and opt-out settings tool by tool.
• Which AI voice recorders are GDPR and SOC 2 compliant: the compliance claims behind storing recorded conversations.
• AI note taker: what it is, types and how to choose: bots, bot-free apps and hardware recorders compared.

Sources

Read Nov 12, 2026.

1. Cornell Legal Information Institute, 18 U.S. Code § 2511.
2. Federal Communications Commission, Recording Telephone Conversations.
3. California Legislative Information, Penal Code § 632.
4. Washington State Legislature, RCW 9.73.030.
5. U.S. District Court, N.D. Cal., In re Otter.AI Privacy Litigation, No. 25-cv-06911-EKL, Order Granting Motion to Dismiss in Part (Aug 13, 2026), and the CourtListener docket.
6. Federal Trade Commission, AI Companies: Uphold Your Privacy and Confidentiality Commitments (Jan 9, 2024).
7. Federal Trade Commission, AI (and other) Companies: Quietly Changing Your Terms of Service Could Be Unfair or Deceptive (Feb 2024).
8. American Bar Association, Formal Opinion 512, Generative Artificial Intelligence Tools (July 29, 2024).
9. EUR-Lex, Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (GDPR), Articles 4, 5, 6, 9, 13 and 28.
10. UK Information Commissioner's Office, Data sharing advice: Can my business record and share an online meeting, event or a lesson that we host?
11. Otter.ai, Otter Notetaker Overview, Help Center.
12. Granola, Security, Privacy and Data FAQs, Docs and Help Center.