It's a phenomenon also highlighted by the lawsuit. If someone has an Otter account and joins a virtual meeting, the software will typically ask the meeting's host for permission to record, but it does not by default ask all the other participants. "In fact, if the meeting host is an Otter accountholder who has integrated their relevant Google Meet, Zoom, or Microsoft Teams accounts with Otter, an Otter Notetaker may join the meeting without obtaining the affirmative consent from any meeting participant, including the host," the lawsuit alleges. "What Otter has done is use its Otter Notetaker meeting assistant to record, transcribe, and utilize the contents of conversations without the Class members' informed consent." Otter that before the audio of meetings is fed into its machine learning systems to help improve an AI speech recognition feature, it is "de-identified," a method by which data can be anonymized. Yet the suit filed on Friday raises concerns about Otter's ability to do this effectively, saying the company provides no public explanation of its "de-identifying" process. "Upon information and belief, Otter's deidentification process does not remove confidential information or guarantee speaker anonymity," the lawsuit argues., A federal lawsuit seeking class-action status accuses Otter.ai of "deceptively and surreptitiously" recording private conversations that the tech company uses to train its popular transcription , A federal lawsuit seeking class-action status accuses Otter.ai of “deceptively and surreptitiously” recording private conversations that the tech company uses to train its popular transcription service without permission from the people using it..