Would you stay on a sales call if you knew you were being recorded without consent?
I was on a call with a founder and they asked me to turn on my camera on Google Meet.
I said no citing that they have brought in the call recorder without my consent. I consent for voice recording and summarizing, not video capture.
He said he needed it.
I said no problem, in that case I will have to cancel and leave the meeting.
But that’s not even the interesting part.
What’s interesting is why I said no.
More and more people are joining calls with AI note-takers, silent recorders, or “meeting assistants”, often without explicitly stating it.
Even if you don’t “accept” the bot, it doesn’t really matter anymore.
If someone wants to record, they will... one way or another.
And that creates a weird imbalance:
You’re being recorded
You didn’t consent
You don’t know how that data will be used, stored, or shared
Now compare that with how companies like Apple handle this.
When you call their support:
They explicitly tell you the call is being recorded
They control the storage and usage of that data
And importantly, they don’t allow you to record freely. If you insist on recording, they can refuse service.
Clear ownership and consent structure.
But in B2B calls today?
None of that exists.
Anyone can:
Record
Transcribe
Feed your conversation into AI
Store it indefinitely
All without saying a word.
So the real question is: Should business conversations move toward explicit mutual consent like Apple support calls? Or is silent recording just going to become the default and everyone has to adapt?
Let me know in the comments what you think about this.
Replies
Tobira.ai
This is such a nuanced topic.
I already assume every business call is being recorded (I use AI assistants a lot myself). My assistant always announces it upfront in the chat.
Beyond that, we solve most of it with NDAs, and they explicitly cover call recordings.
If something sensitive comes up, I have cases when we paused the recording.
@olia_nemirovski Your approach of announcing it upfront + pausing for sensitive bits feels like a strong default we should normalize more in B2B :)
I think it’s probably going to end up somewhere in the middle. Silent recording might become more common technically, but there’s still a trust factor in business conversations that you can’t really ignore.
Explicit consent feels a lot more sustainable long term, especially if companies care about relationships and not just data. Otherwise people will just start assuming everything is being recorded and that changes how they communicate. Then you got this "OpenClaw" thing everywhere!...lol
@zerodarkhub Elvis, this is such a thoughtful take, I really like how you framed it as “somewhere in the middle” rather than an extreme on either side.
I agree that if we don’t protect trust in these conversations, people will start treating every call like it’s being watched by an "OpenClaw" and that completely changes how honest and human those conversations feel.
ConnectMachine
This post has opened a new debate in the code of conduct for B2B and something that should be thoughtfully dealt with.
@syed_shayanur_rahman Couldn’t agree more! This absolutely deserves to be part of a modern B2B code of conduct. As AI note‑takers and recording tools become default, we probably need shared norms (or even lightweight policies) around disclosure, retention, and how that data is used in sales and client conversations.
I understand your point about the efficiency of recording business meetings.
However, my main concern is the lack of prior notice.
I'd appreciate it if you could let me know in advance or ask for my consent before the recording starts.
It’s important for me to be aware of it beforehand
@shyunbill Shyun, thank you for putting this so clearly, you captured my main concern perfectly. I’m not against recording for efficiency, I just want the basic courtesy of being informed and asked first, so I can consciously choose how much I’m comfortable sharing in that setting.
hot take but the consent debate is kinda missing the point. the real problem isnt recording, its that most people on sales calls are performing anyway. camera on or off, recorded or not, youre still in "sales mode" saying things you think the other person wants to hear. the best business conversations ive had were the ones where both sides dropped the act, and whether a bot was transcribing that or not was irrelevant
@umairnadeem Umair, this is a really sharp perspective and I’m glad you brought it up. You’re right that a lot of sales calls are “performances,” and maybe the real opportunity is to design environments where both sides feel safe enough to be real with or without a bot quietly transcribing in the background.
Apollo recorder automatically joins the calls and I always ask the other side whether it's ok or not. Sometimes I remove it by myself without waiting the client's consent. I don't think it's ok to be forced.
@dumango That's the way to go! :)
The interesting part is not even the recording, it's how someone reacts when you say no. Do you think that response tells you more than the tool itself?
This honestly feels like a professionalism issue more than a tech issue, because clear boundaries should not be awkward in business. Do you think good operators handle this better from the start?
I can see why people want recordings for accuracy, but forcing the format usually makes the interaction worse, not better. Have you noticed people become less relaxed the moment recording is involved?
What's weird is that once people know a call might be stored forever, they naturally speak a little differently. Do you think that quietly lowers the quality of real conversations?