The Brief

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.

The company's AI-powered transcription service called Otter Notebook, which can do real-time transcriptions of Zoom, Google Meet, and Microsoft Teams meetings, by default does not ask meeting attendees for permission to record and fails to alert participants that recordings are shared with Otter to improve its artificial intelligence systems, according to the suit filed Friday.

The plaintiff in the suit is a man named Justin Brewer of San Jacinto, who alleges his privacy was "severely invaded" upon realizing Otter was secretly recording a confidential conversation.

The suit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, claims Otter's covert recording violates state and federal privacy and wiretap laws. It seeks to represent others in California who have had chats unknowingly shared with Otter, which the lawyers contend Otter does to "derive financial gain."

Neither Brewer's legal team nor a spokesperson for Otter returned requests for comment.

Otter's privacy policy does not hide the AI training. It says it receives "explicit permission" from users to train its systems on meeting transcripts when users check a box granting Otter and third parties to ingest the private conversations "for training and product improvement purposes," but the lawsuit maintains many still are being duped.

In recent months, new privacy questions have dogged Otter as it has become increasingly deployed in workplaces around the world.

Some 25 million people now use its AI transcription tools, which have recorded and processed more than 1 billion meetings since the company was founded in 2016, the company says.

Users have shared horror stories on platforms such as X and Reddit about Otter's automated recording tools backfiring.

Last year, an AI researcher and engineer said Otter had recorded a Zoom meeting with investors, then shared with him a transcription of the chat including "intimate, confidential details" about a business discussed after he had left the meeting. Those portions of the conversation ended up killing a deal, The Washington Post reported.

Politico's China correspondent has written about interviewing a Uyghur human rights activist using Otter and realizing that the company shares user data with third parties, raising fears over the possibility the Chinese government could attempt to access raw transcriptions of conversations with dissidents. Otter has said it does not share any data with foreign governments or law enforcement agencies.

On Reddit, users have complained about Otter joining meetings automatically when the service is linked to workplace calendars and recording chats without consent.

It's a phenomenon also highlighted by the lawsuit. If someone has an Otter account and joins a virtual meeting, the software typically will 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 claims 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 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.

Democratic Sen. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland said Thursday that he will run for Senate Majority Leader in the next Congress, setting up a challenge to Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer after the party swept to power in the midterm elections.

Van Hollen said in a statement that “the American people called for change” and that is why he is running.

“It’s now on us to meet this moment, and to do that we need new leadership,” Van Hollen said. “This is not about any one person — it’s about answering the call of the American people. That is why I’m running for Senate Majority Leader.”

Van Hollen’s challenge comes after he said he was considering a bid and after Schumer has said he has the necessary support to win. The closed-door, secret-ballot election will be held in early December.

The race will be the first contested election for Democratic leader in decades. The question of whether to reelect Schumer has already divided the caucus and many senators will not say publicly how they will vote. They have privately deliberated about what message to take from the election, and Schumer recruited many of the party’s winning candidates and raised money for them.

Schumer has been talking to Democratic senators since the election about forming an agenda for 2027.

“I’m going to win it,” Schumer told The Associated Press in an interview last week.

The Los Angeles Unified School District may lease spaces in its elementary, middle and high schools to use as childcare spaces for babies. 

The district is putting together a list of qualified providers and looking to identify spaces it could lease.

Ranae Amezquita, executive director of the district’s early childhood education division, said once the district has a list of spaces, it will start a request for proposal process that childcare providers can apply to during the 2027-2028 school year.

Why is LAUSD looking to expand childcare options now?

In April, LAUSD board members passed a resolution in an aim to expand childcare and early education slots in the district.

The district currently runs about 90 preschools, called early education centers, for children 2 to 4 years old, but it has only four centers that serve children under 2. “The problem with infant care — the reason we can't open them ourself at this time, is because of the cost,” said Amezquita at a board meeting Thursday.

The need for local infant and toddler childcare is high. In 2022, L.A. County assessed that the county only had enough licensed spaces to care for 4% of kids under 2. At the same time, the district has been facing declining enrollment amid lower birth rates. The resolution to expand early childhood care aims to, in part, strengthen the enrollment pipeline into the district.

Learn more about affordable childcare in LA

• For many California parents, paying for childcare means racking up credit card debt
• Why childcare in California may get harder to find

In an extraordinary turn of events, the state’s judicial watchdog has removed Judge Robert Draper, 84, from the Los Angeles County Superior Court after 14 years of service. He faced several counts of misconduct prior to losing reelection earlier this year.

The California Commission on Judicial Performance concluded Tuesday in an 87-page decision that Draper engaged in 17 instances of behavior that made him no longer fit for office. He hasn’t heard a case since 2023 because of the issues.

“Judge Draper persistently violated the standards governing judicial behavior and engaged in extensive and severe misconduct,” the commission said in a statement, adding that it was “aggravated by his refusal to accept responsibility for his misconduct, and his lack of insight or remorse for his misconduct and its effect on others.”

Draper previously admitted to some of the claims and denied others in interviews with LAist earlier this year. In a statement this week, he called the decision “deeply disappointing.”

“Any individual put under such intense and meticulous scrutiny likely would find themselves in a similar situation, albeit with slightly different facts,” he said.

Draper said the investigation came at a time when he raised concerns within the judiciary, and that it was used “presumably for purposes of dismissing his dissent by discrediting him.”

He plans to pursue “other avenues” to change the system, according to the statement. Draper's attorney declined to share what those would be.

 “It’s very rare for a judge to be removed from the bench,” said Laurie Levenson, a professor at Loyola Law School. “It’s the ultimate sanction against a judge.”

The commission has only removed 15 judges since it gained the authority to do so in 1995, according to its records, with the last for an L.A. County Superior Court judge happening in 2006.

The misconduct

The decision comes after a yearslong investigation and legal proceedings with independent evaluators. Prior to that, Draper had never been disciplined. According to the commission, his long list of misconduct includes:

• Making “offensive” and “insensitive” comments in court about race and gender.
• Sending “abusive” emails and unnecessary graphic pictures of his naked backside to colleagues.
• Acting with “deliberate defiance of his presiding judge’s orders” by continuing to access court systems and work on cases while on involuntary leave.

Some allegations the commission reviewed were dismissed for lack of evidence, including one that he inappropriately touched an attorney’s hair.

What happens next

While Draper lost reelection, his seat is now empty sooner than usual. Judge-elect Tal Khan Valbuena is on deck to replace him in January.

It’s possible Gov. Gavin Newsom may decide to appoint Khan Valbuena sooner. The court could also move another judge into his department.