# Can I license call recordings to AI?

> Searching whether you can sell call recordings to AI? Recordings are the riskiest archive to license. The Otter.ai ruling and voiceprint law urge caution.

By Matt Burns, Vaultfish. Canonical: https://vaultfish.com/answers/can-i-sell-call-recordings-to-ai  
Published: 2026-08-13  
Updated: 2026-10-14

## The short answer

Recordings are the highest-risk archive category. A court let Wiretap Act, California privacy and Illinois biometric claims go forward against Otter.ai because training conversations for profit could be tortious. Spirit Airlines excluded 30.9 million recordings from its sale. Ask counsel before licensing.

Recordings carry the voices of customers, partners and staff, and that's why I'd treat them as their own category. Three laws come up in the cases.

## What did the Otter.ai court decide?

[In re Otter.AI Privacy Litigation](https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.454675/gov.uscourts.cand.454675.68.0.pdf) (N.D. Cal., Judge Eumi K. Lee, Dkt 68, 13 Aug 2026) denied most of Otter's motion to dismiss.

On the Wiretap Act, the court said the one-party consent exception doesn't apply when an interception has a criminal or tortious purpose.

The plaintiffs alleged Otter used conversation data to train its models "for its own pecuniary gain," and the court wrote that "committing a tort and seeking a profit are not mutually exclusive."

The court also let a California Penal Code 631(a) claim go forward, treating Otter as a possible third-party eavesdropper. The case is at the pleading stage.

## What about voiceprints?

The Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act covers voiceprints. The court let the voiceprint claims go forward because plaintiffs alleged Otter captured and stored voiceprints to identify the same people in later meetings.

BIPA sets [liquidated damages](https://www.ilga.gov/Legislation/ILCS/Articles?ActID=3004&ChapterID=57) of $1,000 for a negligent violation and $5,000 for an intentional or reckless one, or actual damages if greater. For the same person and the same method, the statute allows one recovery.

## What did Spirit do?

Spirit's sale schedule lists call recordings, 30,865,471 of them, as "Not Included" ([Doc 1463](https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysb.331039/gov.uscourts.nysb.331039.1463.0.pdf)). The [flight attendants' union](https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysb.331039/gov.uscourts.nysb.331039.1489.0.pdf) pointed out that nearly every consumer-facing category was excluded while employee records were included.

## Does a company's own call archive face the same claims?

I found no holding either way. The Otter reasoning is the analogy a plaintiff would reach for. That's my inference and no ruling.

Talk to a privacy or commercial lawyer in your state before you sign. The [rights check](/rights-check) asks about personal data and customer contracts and lists what to settle with counsel.

Figure: scale, Illinois BIPA damages per violation: Negligent violation $1,000, Intentional or reckless $5,000 (emphasized). Illinois charges five times more when a violation is intentional or reckless. Source: 740 ILCS 14/20, Illinois General Assembly.

_Vaultfish helps you run the process. We are not lawyers and this is not legal advice. If you need counsel who knows this area, we can point you to one._

## Sources

- [In re Otter.AI Privacy Litigation](https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.454675/gov.uscourts.cand.454675.68.0.pdf)
- [liquidated damages](https://www.ilga.gov/Legislation/ILCS/Articles?ActID=3004&ChapterID=57)
- [Doc 1463](https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysb.331039/gov.uscourts.nysb.331039.1463.0.pdf)
- [flight attendants' union](https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysb.331039/gov.uscourts.nysb.331039.1489.0.pdf)