You are watching a webinar preview. To view the full webinar, log in to your Justia Connect account or sign up for free.

AI Notetaker Minefield: Navigating Legal & Business Risks With AI Notetakers & Meeting Recordings

As AI notetakers become increasingly popular for recording, transcribing, and summarizing meetings, they’re transforming how businesses document conversations. But behind the convenience lies a complex web of legal and business risks that many organizations are overlooking. In some states, recording a conversation without everyone’s consent could violate wiretapping laws, and using certain third-party AI tools might expose you to liability for aiding and abetting. Additionally, these tools can inadvertently compromise confidentiality or privilege. Discoverability of these documents in litigation may create unwanted issues.

This cutting-edge webinar will unpack the critical legal and business implications of using AI notetakers and recording tools. We’ll explore:

Consent and compliance: What you need to know about state and federal recording laws and how to obtain and document consent
Wiretapping risks: How third-party tools could land you in legal hot water for aiding and abetting
Confidentiality and privilege: How to protect sensitive information when using these tools
Accuracy and accountability: How to manage the risks of inaccuracies with AI-generated transcripts and summaries
Vendor due diligence: How to choose the right tools to mitigate risk
Policy development: Crafting clear, comprehensive guidelines for employee use

Whether you're a legal professional, compliance officer, or business leader, this session will equip you with the insights and strategies you need to use AI notetakers responsibly and legally.

Duration of this webinar: 60 minutes

Originally broadcast: October 17, 2025 11:00 AM PT

Webinar Highlights

This webinar is divided into section summaries, which you can scan for key points and then dive into the sections that interest you the most.

00:00 Introduction

James Gatto, a partner at Sheppard Mullin, is introduced as the speaker, with extensive experience in AI and intellectual property. James discusses the evolving field of AI, particularly the legal issues arising from AI note-takers and meeting recordings. He emphasizes the importance of understanding the differences AI introduces in note-taking and recording, which create unique legal challenges. The presentation will cover the widespread use of AI tools in companies and the legal implications of their use.

04:54 AI Note-Taking Tools and Legal Compliance

AI note-taking tools are widely used by companies and individuals, with platforms like Zoom and Microsoft Teams incorporating these features. James stresses the importance of companies developing policies for the use of AI tools to ensure legal compliance and protect business interests. Different AI tools have varying features, which can lead to different legal and compliance issues. AI tools can generate various outputs, such as transcripts, summaries, and to-do lists, which need careful management. Sentiment analysis is a feature of some AI tools, raising additional legal concerns regarding privacy and consent.

15:15 Consent and Privacy Concerns

Consent and privacy are critical issues when using AI recording tools, with varying state laws on consent requirements. James explains the challenges of obtaining affirmative consent and the potential legal risks of relying on implied consent. Companies need to manage notice and consent effectively, especially with remote work complicating jurisdictional issues. Accuracy of AI-generated transcripts is crucial, since errors can lead to significant business and legal problems. Policies should integrate AI recording practices with document retention and confidentiality policies.

20:23 Vendor Diligence and Legal Risks

Vendor diligence is essential when adopting AI tools, focusing on security, privacy, and legal compliance features. James highlights the legal risks of using AI tools, such as potential liability under wiretapping laws if third-party providers misuse recordings. The Colorado AI Act imposes obligations on employers and developers to ensure AI tools are used legally. A lawsuit against Heartland Dental and RingCentral illustrates the legal challenges of AI recording tools, emphasizing the need for clear policies. Accuracy of AI-generated outputs is critical, and companies should review these outputs to prevent misinformation.

30:50 Confidentiality and Privilege Management

Confidentiality and privilege management are crucial when using AI tools, especially regarding attorney-client privilege. Companies should control access to AI-generated outputs to maintain confidentiality and comply with legal requirements. Sentiment analysis and biometric data use in AI tools raise additional privacy concerns under various laws. Document retention and deletion policies must align with AI tool outputs to avoid regulatory issues. Vendor diligence should include reviewing terms of service and privacy policies to ensure compliance with legal standards.

50:38 Policy Development and Implementation

Policy development should consider the unique features and legal issues of each AI tool used by a company. Transparency, notice, and consent are key policy areas, with companies often mandating specific tools to maintain control. Retention and deletion policies for AI-generated outputs should align with existing company policies. Vendor diligence is crucial, with companies often preferring enterprise versions of tools for uniformity and compliance. Employee training on AI policies is essential to ensure understanding and compliance, reducing legal risks.

59:59 Q&A and Closing Remarks

Companies should regularly update their AI policies to reflect changes in laws and ongoing litigation. James answers audience questions, emphasizing the importance of clarity and accuracy in AI recording notifications. Liability for AI transcription errors generally falls on the company, with varying legal implications depending on the context. Attorneys should understand the definitions of 'recording' under wiretapping laws to ensure compliance.

Please note this AI-generated summary provides a general overview of the webinar but may not capture all details, nuances, or the exact words of the speaker. For complete accuracy, please refer to the original webinar recording.

Speaker

James Gatto AI Team Leader
Sheppard Mullin

Jim Gatto is a partner in Sheppard Mullin’s Washington D.C. office, where he founded and co-leads the firm's 120+ person Artificial Intelligence Team. With a robust technical background and over 35 years of experience, Jim provides strategic, business-focused advice on all aspects of intellectual property, technology transactions, regulatory issues, and litigation, particularly those driven by innovative business models and disruptive technologies. Read More ›

Continuing Legal Education (CLE) Credits

*CLE credit is only available to Justia Connect Pros. Not a Pro? Upgrade today>>

California CLE

Status: Approved

Credits: 1.00 General

Earn Credit Until: June 30, 2026

New Jersey CLE

Status: Approved

Credits: 1.20 General

Earn Credit Until: October 16, 2026

North Carolina CLE

Status: Approved

Credits: 1.00 General

Earn Credit Until: February 28, 2026

Ohio CLE

Status: Approved

Credits: 1.00 General

Earn Credit Until: December 31, 2026

Texas CLE

Status: Approved

Credits: 1.00 General

Earn Credit Until: September 30, 2026

This presentation is approved for one hour of General CLE credit in California, North Carolina, and Ohio. This program has been approved by the Board on Continuing Legal Education of the Supreme Court of New Jersey for 1.20 hours of total CLE credit. This course has been approved for Minimum Continuing Legal Education credit by the State Bar of Texas Committee on MCLE in the amount of 1.00 credit hours.

Justia only reports attendance in jurisdictions in which a particular Justia CLE Webinar is officially accredited. Lawyers may need to self-submit their certificates for CLE credit in jurisdictions not listed above.

Note that CLE credit, including partial credit, cannot be earned outside of the relevant accreditation period. To earn credit for a course, a lawyer must watch the entire course within the relevant accreditation period. Lawyers who have viewed a presentation multiple times may not be able to claim credit in their jurisdiction more than once. Justia reserves the right, at its discretion, to grant an attendee partial or no credit, in accordance with viewing duration and other methods of verifying course completion.

At this time, Justia only offers CLE courses officially accredited in certain states. Lawyers may generate a generic attendance certificate to self-submit credit in their own jurisdiction, but Justia does not guarantee that lawyers will receive their desired CLE credit through the self-submission or reciprocity process.

Looking for CLE credit? Visit CLE Dashboard