This basically would outlaw ANY device that is voice activated, because it has to constantly be 'recording' to be able to be activated.
This basically would outlaw ANY device that is voice activated, because it has to constantly be 'recording' to be able to be activated.
Tell me, which of these do Alexa and the like perform?
Would it be more difficult? Yes! This is the reality for any company where rights and laws actually matter. If you can't abide, you can't release. Very simple.
I was thinking that in order to fingerprint a voice, you have to "record" it to a digital format that you can process to determine if it is the user who has consented. Even if it is deleted after processing, it was still "recorded" for a few milliseconds at least.
Does the law as written make that distinction? Would recording locally to check a fingerprint not still break the law?