3 ms·

Depending on where you live, that might violate wiretapping laws. Most of North America requires at least one party consent.

• MrWiffles 4y ago
  I’m not in agreement with this idea, but i wonder if these companies could legally be considered a participant and therefore the one party consenting…
  • bigdict 4y ago
    Interesting thought, that's something that could be buried deep in a EULA.
  • dehrmann 4y ago
    It probably counts as one-party consent, but not two. California requires two.
    • deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    • wnoise 4y ago
      Although the standard description is "two-party", it's almost always really "all-party".
  • deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
• jwandborg 4y ago
  It could also not count as wiretapping, since it's about transcription, not about audio recordings. If the transcription service's presence in the call isn't hidden from other participants, is it still wiretapping?
  • klyrs 4y ago
    I'll be damned, that appears to be a huge bloody loophole. https://www.legaltranscriptionservice.com/wire-tap-transcription/ https://www.legaltranscriptionservice.com/wire-tap-transcrip...
  • notjulianjaynes 4y ago
    For Otter.ai that's probably moot because it also saves an audio recording that can be played back alongside text.