That’s not totally true either. First, it varies quite a bit on jurisdiction (but let’s say U.S.). Second, the lack of model release when it would be required does not mean the model suddenly owns the photograph, it rather just restricts how the owner may use it. Thirdly, in many U.S. states, a model release may only be needed when the photograph is used in promotion of a product, or if it was not taken in public.

IANAL

I absolutely can do that. Laws vary greatly around the world, and your (I'd wager North American) laws don't apply where I am.

LexisNexis makes money taking pictures of me in my car, tagging location data to it and selling that data back to other businesses like Lawyers and Insurance companies. I never signed a release.

I'm not familiar with the case law, but e.g.

https://codes.findlaw.com/ca/penal-code/pen-sect-632.html

In fact I doubt there's fully relevant case law, as I think the case would be that the trained model is the recording device, and it could be demonstrated that verbatim strings from presumed confidential communications are regurgitated by the model when appropriately prompted.