Doubt. The law likely talks about making unauthorized recordings. There is likely nothing in the law that would disallow automatic transcription if no recording is created.
Unless the law is extremely vague such as “it is unlawful for a microphone to pick up conversations” the law likely doesn’t cover this situation.
I am more than happy (and eager) to be proven wrong, but in my experience the law tends to lag behind tech by quite a bit.
I didn’t check the actual law, always a good idea to do so.
So, §201 StGB actually covers both, it is forbidden to “aufnehmen” (record) as well as “mithören” (spy on). Bonus, its forbidden to cite transcription (im Wortlaut mitteilen).
Its an old law, going back to video cameras with magnetic tape and actually tapping a phone line. So it was used quite often, including the mentioned fake surveillance cameras, that didn’t record or even view anything but seemed to the public they did.
When dashcams became a thing people would be sentenced for using them. These days you can use dashcams, but never save for more than 24h or show the recording to anyone but the police/court.
I guess the law is a relict of living next door to Stasi, but its really just a guess of mine.
If huge tech corps are good at anything, it’s swerving around laws or simply deciding to ignore them.
They’ll argue that since you consented, it’s not spying.
And they’ll put something in the terms that it’s your responsibility to inform people around that your or their conversations will be recorded (lol, as if anyone would - but they’ll claim that as a defence).
And if they end up in court and get fined, even millions is just a slap on the wrist compared to how much they made from all that juicy data.
Doubt. The law likely talks about making unauthorized recordings. There is likely nothing in the law that would disallow automatic transcription if no recording is created.
Unless the law is extremely vague such as “it is unlawful for a microphone to pick up conversations” the law likely doesn’t cover this situation.
I am more than happy (and eager) to be proven wrong, but in my experience the law tends to lag behind tech by quite a bit.
I didn’t check the actual law, always a good idea to do so.
So, §201 StGB actually covers both, it is forbidden to “aufnehmen” (record) as well as “mithören” (spy on). Bonus, its forbidden to cite transcription (im Wortlaut mitteilen).
Its an old law, going back to video cameras with magnetic tape and actually tapping a phone line. So it was used quite often, including the mentioned fake surveillance cameras, that didn’t record or even view anything but seemed to the public they did.
When dashcams became a thing people would be sentenced for using them. These days you can use dashcams, but never save for more than 24h or show the recording to anyone but the police/court.
I guess the law is a relict of living next door to Stasi, but its really just a guess of mine.
If huge tech corps are good at anything, it’s swerving around laws or simply deciding to ignore them.
They’ll argue that since you consented, it’s not spying.
And they’ll put something in the terms that it’s your responsibility to inform people around that your or their conversations will be recorded (lol, as if anyone would - but they’ll claim that as a defence).
And if they end up in court and get fined, even millions is just a slap on the wrist compared to how much they made from all that juicy data.
Laws will not stop them.