Is your meeting confidential?
People say things in meetings they would never put in an email. Salary bands. A candid read on a partner. The negotiation floor. Legal strategy. That's what meetings are for — the medium where you can still think out loud.
Which makes it odd how rarely anyone asks where all that thinking-out-loud actually goes. The words leave your mouth, become audio, hit a server, possibly feed a model, possibly become a transcript, possibly get retained under a policy you agreed to by clicking "join." "Confidential" on a vendor homepage tells you nothing about any of that.
We put the word on our homepage too. So here's what we think it should be required to mean — three questions concrete enough to check, and our answer to each. Not because you should trust the answers, but because every one of them is verifiable, which is the only kind of confidentiality claim worth making.
Question 1: Who processes your words, besides the people in the room?
A translated meeting is, unavoidably, a processed meeting. Speech becomes text, text becomes another language, an AI writes the recap. The confidentiality question isn't whether machines touch your words — it's which machines, run by whom, under what terms.
Our answer: voice and chat translation run on our own engine, on dedicated servers in France — not routed through generic third-party translation APIs, so your negotiation doesn't transit a consumer service. The AI features that do use an external model (the recap) are pinned to an EU provider under zero-data-retention terms — your meeting content is processed and immediately discarded, not stored, not used for training. No meeting content reaches a US-domiciled model. Document translation goes through exactly one named sub-processor (DeepL's Document API, for file-format support), disclosed on our sub-processor list rather than "available on request."
The checkable part: every vendor that touches meeting data is named on the page, with what it does and where it's domiciled.