Is it legal to record meetings with an AI notetaker in Australia?

The short answer: it depends on your state and who is in the meeting

Recording a meeting with an AI notetaker is lawful in Australia when the recording rules of every participant’s state or territory are met, and the safe way to meet all of them is to announce the recording and get everyone’s agreement before it starts. There is no single national rule for recording conversations. Each state and territory has its own surveillance or listening devices Act, and the federal interception law sits on top for calls.

AI notetakers such as Otter, Fireflies, Microsoft Copilot in Teams and clinical scribes like Heidi all capture meeting audio to produce a transcript and summary. For the purposes of these Acts, that is using a device to record a private conversation. A conversation is generally “private” when the circumstances suggest the speakers want it heard only by the people present, which describes most client, staff and board meetings.

One party versus all party consent: the state by state map

Five jurisdictions generally require all principal parties to consent before a party records a private conversation; three let a party record but restrict what they do with it. The table summarises the main recording offence in each Act for a person who is a party to the conversation. Every Act also has exceptions for warrants, law enforcement and unintentional hearing, which are omitted here.

Jurisdiction	Act and section	Can a party record without everyone’s consent?
NSW	Surveillance Devices Act 2007, s 7	Generally no. Allowed if all principal parties consent, or one consents and the recording is reasonably necessary to protect their lawful interests, or is not made to communicate or publish it to non parties
Victoria	Surveillance Devices Act 1999, s 6	Yes. The offence covers recording a conversation you are not a party to without each party’s consent. Section 11 restricts communicating or publishing the record
Queensland	Invasion of Privacy Act 1971, s 43	Yes. The offence does not apply to a party. Section 45 restricts a party communicating or publishing the record
WA	Surveillance Devices Act 1998, s 5	Generally no. Allowed if each principal party consents, or one consents and it is reasonably necessary to protect their lawful interests
SA	Surveillance Devices Act 2016, s 4	Generally no. Allowed if all principal parties consent, or it is reasonably necessary to protect the recorder’s lawful interests
ACT	Listening Devices Act 1992, s 4	Generally no. Allowed if each principal party consents, or one consents and has reasonable grounds that it protects their lawful interests, or it is not for communicating to non parties
NT	Surveillance Devices Act 2007, s 11	Yes. The offence covers recording a conversation you are not a party to without each party’s consent
Tasmania	Listening Devices Act 1991, s 5	Generally no. Allowed if all principal parties consent, or one consents and it protects their lawful interests, or it is not for publication to non parties

The penalties are criminal. In NSW, for example, the maximum is 500 penalty units for a corporation, and 100 penalty units or five years’ imprisonment, or both, for an individual.

Two cautions about the exceptions. The “lawful interests” exceptions are narrow and depend on the facts of each case; they are not a general licence to record business meetings. And the “not for publication” exceptions in NSW, the ACT and Tasmania sit awkwardly with an AI notetaker, which usually exists to send a transcript or summary to others, sometimes including people who were not in the meeting.

Phone and VoIP calls: the federal interception rules

For calls, the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 also applies, and it defines interception as listening to or recording a communication passing over a telecommunications system without the knowledge of the person making it. Section 7 prohibits interception except as the Act allows.

Because the definition turns on knowledge, a clear announcement at the start of the call, such as the familiar “this call may be recorded”, is the practical control. Interception law is technical, and whether a particular app captures audio “in its passage over” a system can be arguable, so get advice if you are building call recording into a product. The state Acts still apply to the conversation itself, so an announcement that leads to agreement covers both.

Meetings across state lines and with overseas participants

When participants are in different jurisdictions, design for the strictest rule that could apply, which in practice means everyone’s consent. A Sydney host recording a Teams call with a client in Melbourne and a supplier in Perth is dealing with NSW, Victorian and WA law at once, and it’s rarely clear which one a court would apply.

Overseas participants add their own laws, some of which also require all party consent. A single practice for every meeting, wherever people are, is easier to follow and to prove than a rule that changes with the attendee list.

Privacy Act duties for transcripts and summaries

A transcript or AI summary that identifies people is personal information, so the Privacy Act applies to collecting it, storing it, using it and sending it offshore. These obligations sit alongside the recording laws and apply to APP entities, which include most businesses with annual turnover above $3 million, and some smaller ones such as health service providers. See the Privacy Act for small business software for the exemption.

• Notice (APP 5). At or before the time of collection, take reasonable steps to tell people what is being collected and why. The recording announcement can do this, backed by your privacy policy.
• Use (APP 6). Use transcripts for the purpose you gave. Feeding them into other systems, such as training a model or marketing analysis, needs a proper basis.
• Security and retention (APP 11). Restrict who can access recordings, and delete them when no longer needed.
• Overseas storage (APP 8). Many notetaker vendors process audio offshore. Before disclosing personal information to an overseas recipient, you must take reasonable steps to ensure it won’t breach the APPs. Our guide to AI data sovereignty covers onshore options.

The wider rules on AI and personal information are covered in our guide to the Privacy Act and AI.

Health, legal and HR meetings need extra care

Meetings involving health information, legal advice or employment matters carry higher stakes, so get explicit agreement, limit who receives the output, and keep a human check on the notes.

• Health. Ahpra’s guidance says AI scribes using generative AI will generally require informed consent, warns of possible criminal implications if consent isn’t obtained before recording, and says the software should include an explicit consent step first. The practitioner must check the accuracy of the notes. See AI in healthcare.
• Legal. A recording or transcript passed to a vendor or circulated widely can create arguments about confidentiality and privilege. Consider turning notetakers off for advice meetings.
• HR. If a disciplinary or grievance meeting is to be recorded, agree the terms with everyone first, give a copy to both sides and restrict access.

How to set up notetakers, or build transcription, with consent built in

Make consent a step the system enforces, not a habit people may forget. Most platforms now have settings that help.

1. Turn on platform consent controls. Microsoft Teams, for example, has an explicit recording consent policy that requires participants to agree before they are recorded or transcribed.
2. Stop bots joining uninvited. Restrict third party notetaker bots to approved accounts, and set them not to join external meetings automatically.
3. Announce at the start, every time. Put the script below in the meeting template and the bot’s join message.
4. Limit distribution. Send summaries only to attendees by default.
5. Set retention. Delete audio once the transcript is checked, and transcripts on a schedule.

If you are building transcription into your own app, put an explicit consent screen before capture starts, record who consented and when, let a participant decline without losing access to the service, and choose processing in Australian regions where possible. Our AI integration work and AI voice agents builds treat consent capture as part of the feature.

A consent script and policy clauses

Meeting script: “Before we start, I’d like to use [tool] to record and transcribe this meeting so I can send everyone accurate notes. The recording is stored [where] and deleted after [period]. Is everyone happy for me to record? If anyone would prefer not, I’ll take notes by hand.”

Policy clauses to adapt:

• Staff must announce any recording or AI transcription at the start of a meeting and obtain the agreement of all participants before recording begins.
• If any participant declines, the recording must not start, or must stop.
• AI notetakers may be used only through accounts approved by [role], and must not join external meetings automatically.
• Recordings and transcripts are business records containing personal information; they must be stored only in approved locations and deleted under the retention schedule.
• AI notetakers must not be used in [health consultations without documented consent, legal advice meetings, or other sensitive meetings listed by the business].

How AWLabs approaches this

We aren’t lawyers, and this page is general information. When we build transcription, AI scribes or call handling into software, we put consent capture, the announcement, retention and onshore processing into the design, and we record the consent event so the business can show it was obtained. Have your recording practice and scripts reviewed by a lawyer who knows the states you operate in.