Otter.ai Faces Lawsuit for Secretly Recording Virtual Meetings—Did Your Privacy Just Get Sold?

Another day, another tech giant playing fast and loose with user data. Otter.ai—the AI-powered transcription darling—just got slapped with a lawsuit for allegedly recording virtual conversations without consent. Cue the collective gasp from privacy advocates and corporate compliance officers.

Here’s the kicker: the recordings weren’t just stored. They were allegedly mined, monetized, or worse—handed off to third parties. Because why let ethics get in the way of 'innovation'?

Meanwhile, in finance-land: 'But the AI arbitrage opportunities!' whispers some hedge fund manager, already pricing the settlement into Otter.ai’s next funding round. Priorities, right?

TLDRs:

• California man sues Otter.ai, claiming the AI tool secretly records meetings without participant consent.
• The lawsuit alleges Otter.ai violates state and federal privacy laws for financial gain.
• Users report confidential information captured and shared, raising workplace and security concerns.
• Otter.ai claims data is anonymized, but the lawsuit questions its effectiveness in protecting privacy.

A California man has filed a federal class-action lawsuit against Mountain View-based tech company Otter.ai, alleging that the company secretly records private VIRTUAL meetings without consent.

The plaintiff, Justin Brewer of San Jacinto, claims that Otter’s AI-powered transcription tool, Otter Notebook, covertly captured a confidential conversation, causing him “severe invasion” of privacy.

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, accuses Otter of violating state and federal privacy and wiretap laws. Lawyers representing Brewer contend that the recordings are used to train Otter’s AI systems, providing the company with financial benefits while users remain unaware.

Automated Transcriptions Spark Concerns

Otter Notebook allows real-time transcriptions for Zoom, Google Meet, and Microsoft Teams meetings. According to the lawsuit, the service does not automatically request permission from all meeting participants and fails to alert them that recordings are shared with Otter for AI training purposes.

While Otter’s privacy policy states that it obtains “explicit permission” from users who check a box agreeing to allow the company to use meeting transcripts for AI training, the lawsuit argues many participants remain unaware their conversations are being recorded.

With over 25 million users and more than 1 billion meetings processed since 2016, Otter has become a widely adopted tool in workplaces globally. Yet reports on social media platforms, including Reddit and X, highlight instances where the AI’s recording features caused serious privacy breaches.

Users Report Confidential Data Exposure

Some users have shared troubling experiences where sensitive meeting details were inadvertently captured. In one widely reported case, an AI researcher discovered that Otter had transcribed a meeting with investors, including private business discussions.

The resulting transcription allegedly jeopardized a deal, showcasing the potential consequences of unapproved AI recording.

The lawsuit also cites concerns raised by human rights activists and journalists, noting the possibility of sensitive information being shared with third parties. Although Otter denies sharing data with foreign governments or law enforcement, the potential for misuse remains a focal point of legal scrutiny.

Questions Over Data Anonymization

Otter claims that audio recordings fed into its machine learning systems are “de-identified,” a process meant to anonymize sensitive information.

However, the lawsuit challenges the company’s ability to effectively remove confidential content, asserting that no public explanation exists regarding the de-identification process.

According to the complaint, Otter’s software can join virtual meetings if linked to workplace calendars without obtaining explicit consent from all participants. The Otter Notetaker assistant may thus record and utilize conversations without informed approval from either the meeting host or attendees.

That said, the case against Otter.ai may set a precedent for how tech companies balance AI innovation with user privacy, as courts determine the legal obligations surrounding consent and data usage in the age of automated transcription.