[eigh0xohyeib6Te]

If they are training on inbound e-mails from senders without Google accounts residing in or present at the time of sending in two-party consent states, they are likely in violation of the telephone call recording laws of those states.

[jedberg]

Pretty sure not. I think there is an implied ownership of the email once I send it. Just like if I send you a letter you now own the letter.

[keep_reading]

Got any case law you can cite or are you just making this up?

[eigh0xohyeib6Te]

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.

[keep_reading]

Google also reads your email for spam filtering purposes, including training their filters which has a financial benefit to themselves as well.

Wouldn't this also be a violation of the same Two Party Consent law that you're trying to apply here?