Not sure why you were so heavily downvoted; the title explicitly says "recording user's remote sessions". To record something remotely heavily implies a connection between two places. If it was only recording on the device and nothing else there would be zero reason to say "remote" because it wouldn't be remote, it would be a local recording.

...where does the title say they were uploaded? It says they were recorded. The company admits they were recorded.

It says they recorded it, which strongly implies they had the data and their servers did the recording.

Recording something in a technical context generally implies that it's accessable to the person or group that caused the recording to happen. That is not the case here and the headline is somewhat misleading.

> admits recording users' remote sessions

To me, this sounds like the recording of remote sessions which would involve some sort of connection (otherwise how would it be remote if it's only on the device itself?)

the title is crafted to imply that the sex toy company was recording its users, could only do that remotely. but hey, titles sell

"Sex toy company admits recording..." implies that the company did the recording. A more accurate title might begin "Sex toy company admits product records..."

Hence the "incendiary but correct". Just the "admits recording" is incendiary enough. Or you think the title wasn't written with the purpose of being clicked upon?