AI Interviews
Generally yes, one-way (asynchronous) video interviews are legal. The obligations attach not to the recording itself but to how it is analysed, stored, and used, and those obligations have expanded significantly.
Edvenity Team·2026-07-21·AI Interviews
Recording a candidate answering questions is not itself restricted in most jurisdictions, provided the candidate knows it is happening and has agreed.
What triggers legal obligation is automated analysis. Once software evaluates the recording and that evaluation influences a hiring decision, several regimes apply. Illinois's Artificial Intelligence Video Interview Act requires notice, an explanation of how the AI works, and consent before AI analysis of video interviews. New York City requires annual independent bias audits of automated employment decision tools plus candidate notification. The EU AI Act treats employment decisions as high-risk, with transparency and human-oversight requirements.
Biometric privacy law is a separate layer again, Illinois's BIPA and similar statutes govern facial and voice data specifically, and have produced substantial litigation.
Disclosure before the interview starts, in plain language: that it is recorded, that AI is involved if it is, and what it evaluates.
A human review step before any rejection. This is the single most protective practice available, and it is also simply better hiring.
A documented, consistent process, the same questions and criteria for every candidate for a role, which is both the fairness argument and the audit trail if a decision is ever challenged.
An alternative path for candidates who cannot reasonably complete the format, whether for disability, connectivity, or equipment reasons.
Clear data retention and deletion policy for recordings.
None of this is exotic; most of it is what a well-run process would do anyway.
Requirements vary by jurisdiction and change frequently, this area has moved substantially in the last two years and will continue to.
If your hiring crosses jurisdictions, or if automated screening materially influences outcomes at scale, get advice from an employment lawyer in each relevant region rather than relying on a vendor page, including this one.
Vendors, Edvenity included, can tell you what their tools do. They cannot tell you what your obligations are in your jurisdiction, and any vendor claiming their product makes you compliant by default should be treated with suspicion.
In several jurisdictions, yes, particularly where AI analyses the recording. Illinois requires explicit consent for AI analysis of video interviews. Even where not strictly required, clear disclosure and consent is the defensible practice.
It depends on jurisdiction and on your own data policy. Some regimes require deletion on request within a set period. Define a retention period, document it, tell candidates, and apply it consistently.
No vendor can promise that. Edvenity provides structured, auditable evidence with human review in the workflow, which supports a defensible process. Your obligations depend on your jurisdiction and how you use the tool, and should be confirmed with an employment lawyer.