12 states, including california, disagree.
Edit: where I am we have one-party consent rules for audio recording. I can have my phone in my pocket recording without you knowing just fine. But I can’t tape a microphone to a park bench and record the conversations there that I’m not a part of.
For example, a commonly-held view online is that it should be legal to record interactions with police. By your definition, however, that would be "spying", as the police may not necessarily consent.
It's generally only recording private conversations that's illegal.
It feels like you didn't think about the differences between the two situations at all
I don't particularly like this device mainly due because of the cloud related vulnerabilities - if it used all off-line models, I wouldn't be nearly as opposed to it.
On the other hand, let's not be deliberately disingenuous.
The goal of this device is to record conversations that you're part of, which one would hardly call "spying" in any conventional sense. That's why one-party recordings are legal in many states.
