Google Gemini Tests Import AI Chats to Boost Portability and Choice

Google’s Gemini is quietly testing a way to pull another assistant’s entire conversation history into its own workspace — a small UI change with potentially huge implications for portability, privacy, and how people choose (or switch) AI chatbots.

Background / Overview​

Google has been spotted testing an “Import AI chats” option inside Gemini’s attachment menu that promises to let users upload exported conversation archives from competing assistants such as ChatGPT, Claude, and Copilot so those threads can be continued within Gemini. Early screenshots and hands‑on discoveries indicate the control is currently marked as a beta feature and sits under the plus/attachment menu in Gemini’s web client. The feature appears to prompt users to download an export from the original service and then upload that archive into Gemini so past threads — prompts, responses, and attached media — can be reconstructed.
This move directly addresses the growing frustration around ecosystem lock‑in in consumer and prosumer AI: people accumulate months of prompts, custom fine‑tuning in the form of repeated patterns, and complex project histories in a single assistant, and switching platforms means starting that memory from scratch. Gemini’s importer, if it ships as described, aims to remove that friction and let users bring that context with them. Early reporting also shows Google testing related features — a “Likeness” (video verification/provenance) control and higher‑resolution image download options labelled for print (2K and 4K).

---

Why portability matters: the problem Gemini is trying to solve​

The cost of conversational inertia​

Modern chat assistants are not just Q&A boxes. Over time they accumulate context: recurring instructions, saved drafts, multi‑step research threads, debugging histories, and even embedded code or images. For many users the assistant becomes a de facto project repository. Losing that accumulated context is costly — it means hours of re‑teaching, broken continuity, and reduced productivity.
The result is a classic lock‑in effect: users stay with the first assistant that “knows” them because the switching cost is high. A clean import flow directly targets that pain point and lowers the barrier for users to try or migrate to Gemini. Multiple outlets reporting on the leak frame the feature as a strategic adoption lever for Google.

Practical use cases​

• Migrating months of research notes (e.g., literature review threads) without re‑entering prompts and clarifications.
• Consolidating multiple assistants into one workspace for a single project.
• Preserving developer debugging sessions, code revisions, and instructions in a new assistant.
• Carrying over content created in another model’s conversation (summaries, plans, drafts) for further iteration.

These aren’t theoretical: third‑party tools and community projects already use exported conversation archives to offer search, summarization, and organization for ChatGPT and Claude histories — an indication that demand for portability and archival utility exists today.

---

What the leaked flow looks like (and what’s missing)​

The observed UI and flow​

• The control surfaced in screenshots inside Gemini’s “Attach / +” menu as “Import AI chats,” marked with a small beta badge and a chat‑bubble icon. It reportedly appears beneath NotebookLM access in the same list. Activating it opens a popup that instructs the user to download their chat history from the source assistant and then upload the file to Gemini for ingestion. The popup text also warns that the uploaded content will be stored in the user’s Gemini activity and used to improve Google’s models.

Gaps and unanswered questions​

• Supported source platforms: the screenshots do not publish an exhaustive list. Reporters speculate about ChatGPT, Claude, and Microsoft Copilot based on the leaked UI, but Google has not confirmed supported origins.
• Accepted file formats: the popup does not clearly state which archive types Gemini will accept (ChatGPT exports are ZIPs containing JSON/HTML; Claude uses a ZIP/.dms flow). The importer’s schema compatibility is unannounced.
• Fidelity guarantees: it’s unclear how attachments, media, thread forks, and branching conversation structures will be reconstructed inside Gemini.
• Training/usage policy details: the popup language suggests the imported data will appear in Activity and may be used for model improvement — but the exact opt‑in/opt‑out mechanics and whether enterprise data will be excluded are unspecified.

Because these implementation details are central to trust and enterprise adoption, the absence of official documentation or precise UI text means users should treat current reports as early leaks, not finished product claims.

---

Verification: can you already export chats from rival services?​

Contrary to some early interpretations of the leak, major assistants already provide export mechanisms that make a migration flow technically possible today:

• OpenAI / ChatGPT: ChatGPT includes an account “Export Data” flow in Settings > Data Controls that produces a ZIP containing your chat history (typically a conversations.json and chat.html). OpenAI’s help documentation details the process and the ZIP delivery via email.
• Anthropic / Claude: Claude exposes a data export in Settings → Privacy (server‑side processing and email delivery), producing a downloadable archive that community tools can convert into readable JSON or Markdown. Multiple third‑party projects and guides document Claude export steps.
• Other tools and third‑party utilities: Several community and commercial tools already parse these exports and reformat them into searchable or portable formats, indicating that cross‑assistant migration is feasible from a technical standpoint.

Put simply: the importer Google is testing doesn’t require upstream platforms to invent new export features from scratch — they already exist for at least the major consumer assistants. What matters is whether Google’s importer supports the export schemas those rivals produce and whether other assistants reciprocate in future.

---

The benefits: productivity, choice, and competition​

Immediate user benefits​

• Seamless continuity: users can resume projects, experiments, and long‑running threads without rebuilding context from zero.
• Freedom to test: lowering the cost of switching encourages experimentation — users can test Gemini while preserving their existing histories.
• Centralized workflows: creatives, researchers, and devs who use multiple assistants can consolidate artifacts into one workspace for easier collaboration and handoffs.

Market impact​

• Erodes lock‑in: easier migration pressures incumbents to improve interoperability or competitive features.
• Accelerates feature parity: when content portability is feasible, assistants must differentiate on accuracy, integrations, privacy guarantees, and cost — not just who holds the user’s memory.
• Third‑party opportunity: a standardized portable archive format (or de facto conventions) will create a market for migration tools, search/analytics layers, and enterprise connectors.

These changes would be good for end users and competition — provided the functionality is implemented transparently and safely.

---

The risks: privacy, training use, fidelity, and corporate controls​

1. Privacy and model training​

Initial reports indicate imported conversations and subsequent interactions are stored in Gemini Activity and may be used to train Google’s models. That wording — even appearing in a beta prompt — immediately raises flags for anyone importing sensitive content (personal data, client information, credentials, PII). If imported data is used for model training without strong de‑identification, organizations could inadvertently seed training datasets with confidential information.
Why that matters:

• Regulatory exposure (data residency, GDPR data processing obligations) could be triggered if personal data moves between processors.
• Enterprise contracts or confidentiality agreements may forbid reprocessing of client data by third parties.
• Users may mistakenly upload data containing personal identifiers, credentials, or IP without realizing it will be used to improve models.

2. Fidelity and mis‑reconstruction​

Export formats vary: JSON schemas, HTML conversations, CSVs, attachments stored separately or embedded. Importing is not just a file copy — it requires parsing roles (system/user/assistant), timestamps, branching threads, attachments, and metadata (titles, tags). Poor reconstruction could produce misleading continuity: responses stitched into the wrong thread, missing attachments, or shuffled chronology. That creates false context, which is worse than none because it breeds misplaced trust. Community tools already document edge cases and export quirks, underscoring the engineering challenge.

3. Enterprise data loss or leakage​

Organizations will want:

• Audit trails for what was imported and when.
• Administrative controls to block or approve exports/imports.
• Non‑training pledges or contractual protections for data used within corporate accounts.

Without enterprise‑grade governance, businesses will restrict or block imports entirely, limiting the feature’s usefulness in corporate settings.

4. Provenance and authenticity​

As assistants increasingly produce images, videos, and synthetic media, who authored a piece of content and where it originated matters. Google’s adjacent “Likeness” and “Video Verification” controls suggest the company is aware of synthetic media provenance and identity risks, but details are thin. Importing histories from other systems could complicate provenance if metadata is stripped or transformed during export/import.

---

Technical and operational challenges for Google​

• Schema compatibility: supporting ChatGPT’s ZIPs, Claude’s exports, and any other format means building robust parsers and normalization pipelines.
• Media handling: moving or rehosting images, PDFs, and attachments — and preserving access controls — is non‑trivial.
• Thread branching: Chat histories often branch or fork. Preserving correct structure and role labels is essential for utility.
• Opt‑out mechanics: providing simple, reliable ways for users and admins to prevent imported data from being used for model training.
• Enterprise controls & compliance: consent controls, audit logs, and contractual assurances for non‑training must be available for business users.

If Google solves these engineering and governance problems, the importer will be valuable; if it shortcuts on fidelity or controls, the feature could become risky for many power users and organizations.

---

How an ideal migration flow should work (technical and policy checklist)​

Below is a recommended blueprint — a practical checklist of features that will maximize value while minimizing risk.

• Multiple source formats supported (ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot, JSON/HTML, ZIP).
• Pre‑import preview and scrub tool:
• Show a complete inventory of what will be imported (conversation titles, counts, attachments).
• Provide a “redact sensitive info” helper that flags likely PII (emails, SSNs, API keys) and lets users remove content before upload.
• Training opt‑out toggles:
• Per‑import and per‑account controls to exclude imported content from model training.
• Clear language in the UI about how imported content will be stored and used.
• Enterprise policy controls:
• Admin‑level whitelist/blacklist for imports.
• Audit logs of imports, downloads, and redactions.
• Fidelity reporting:
• After import, show a “reconstruction report” listing any items that could not be reconstructed (missing attachments, branch mismatches).
• Media handling options:
• Allow rehosting to Google storage with selectable access controls, or option to keep media off hosted servers (local only).
• Provenance metadata:
• Preserve original timestamps, assistant identifiers, and source labels in metadata to maintain provenance and auditability.

If Google implements these elements, the importer could be both user‑friendly and enterprise‑safe. If not, it risks becoming a privacy and governance headache.

---

Practical steps for users who want to migrate today​

If you’re considering switching assistants and want to preserve your history, here’s a practical, cautious approach:

• Request an export from your source assistant.
• ChatGPT / OpenAI: Settings → Data Controls → Export Data. Wait for the email and download the ZIP.
• Claude / Anthropic: Settings → Privacy → Export data. Wait for the email and download the ZIP.
• Inspect the archive locally. Open the conversations.json or chat.html to identify any sensitive entries or credentials that should be removed.
• Run a manual scrub:
• Redact personal names, email addresses, API keys, and client identifiers.
• Remove entire conversations that include proprietary or regulated content.
• If using a third‑party migration tool, verify its data handling policy — prefer tools that process files locally in the browser (no upload) or that explicitly do not use your data to train models.
• Only upload to a new assistant after you’ve sanitized the export and confirmed the destination’s training/usage policy for imported data.
• For enterprise users: consult legal/compliance teams and insist on administrative controls before allowing imports on corporate accounts.

This workflow minimizes the risk of accidental exposure and ensures you retain only the content you intend to migrate.

---

Competitive and regulatory implications​

• Consumer expectations will shift: once one major assistant offers reliable imports, users will expect portability as a standard feature.
• Vendors will face pressure to implement export APIs and consistent, documented schemas to enable true portability.
• Regulators may pay attention: cross‑platform data movement raises privacy and contractual concerns that could invite regulatory scrutiny in heavily regulated verticals.
• Enterprises will demand contractual non‑training guarantees and DLP integration before approving imports for corporate accounts.

If Google leads with a well‑engineered, privacy‑first importer, it could accelerate a healthier multi‑assistant ecosystem; if it launches an importer without strong governance, regulatory and enterprise backlash may follow.

---

What we verified and what remains unconfirmed​

Verified:

• TestingCatalog and multiple major outlets have reported screenshots and hands‑on observations showing an “Import AI chats” control inside Gemini’s attachment menu, described as a beta feature.
• OpenAI (ChatGPT) and Anthropic (Claude) offer data export tools today that produce downloadable archives suitable for migration workflows; community projects and guides document how to use those exports.
• Reported adjacent features — higher‑resolution image download options (2K/4K) and a “Likeness” video verification UI — have been observed in testing builds by multiple reporters.

Unconfirmed / open:

• Which exact file formats and platform exports Gemini will accept in its importer.
• Whether Google will offer a per‑import opt‑out for training or a global account setting that prevents imported content from contributing to model updates.
• How attachments and branching conversation structures will be handled during reconstruction.
• Final enterprise controls, audit features, or contractual non‑training options.

Because this is a test/feature‑flag discovery rather than an official launch, these details may change between now and any public release.

---

Bottom line: big promise, real obligations​

Google’s importer test is strategically smart: it targets the single biggest non‑technical reason users stick with an assistant — accumulated context. Portability could usher in a more competitive landscape and give users real power to choose the assistant that best fits their workflows.
But the feature’s value depends on execution. To be genuinely useful and responsible, Google needs to:

• support existing export schemas (so users aren’t forced into manual conversions),
• provide robust pre‑import scrubbing and training opt‑outs,
• offer enterprise governance and audit controls, and
• preserve provenance and fidelity during thread reconstruction.

For users: don’t assume a smooth migration yet. If you plan to import, inspect and redact your export first, and check the destination’s data‑use policies carefully. For enterprises: treat this as a potential capability but demand contractual protections and admin controls before enabling it for corporate accounts.
If Google ships a transparent, governed importer, it will have done something few platform owners have: reduce vendor lock‑in without eroding user privacy — an outcome that benefits both users and the wider AI ecosystem. If it fails to address training uses, provenance, and enterprise controls upfront, the importer will deliver convenience at an unacceptable cost.
The leak is a reminder that portability is now within reach technically; the remaining work is policy and UI design. That’s where the real product leadership — and the real risks — will be decided.

---

Source: Technobezz Google Gemini tests a feature to import chat history from ChatGPT and Claude

 

[ChatGPT]

Google appears to be quietly testing a feature in Gemini that would let users import entire conversation archives from rival chatbots — including ChatGPT, Anthropic’s Claude, Elon Musk’s Grok, and Microsoft Copilot — so they can continue ongoing threads and preserve project context when switching assistants. Early screenshots and tester write‑ups show an “Import AI chats” entry tucked into Gemini’s attach/“+” menu that prompts users to download an export from the source assistant and upload it into Gemini; the control is labeled beta and currently hidden for most accounts.
This seemingly small UI change, if it ships as tested, would address one of the most practical barriers to switching AI assistants — the loss of accumulated context — while also raising immediate and complex questions about privacy, training‑data usage, enterprise governance, file‑format fidelity, and security. Below I summarize what has been observed so far, verify the technical feasibility of the flow, and lay out what users and IT teams should plan for if this importer becomes generally available.

Background / Overview​

For power users, creatives, and teams, modern chat assistants are less like ephemeral chatbots and more like stateful project workspaces. Threads accumulate clarifications, system messages, code snippets, attachments, and iterative edits that together form institutional memory. That accumulation creates “context lock‑in”: switching platforms can mean rebuilding months of work from scratch, a costly friction that favors incumbents. Gemini’s import test directly targets that problem by offering a first‑party path to bring exported conversation archives into Google’s assistant.
TestingCatalog — the independent tester credited with surfacing the UI — captured a modal that instructs users to download an export from the source assistant (the user does the export step) and then upload the resulting archive into Gemini. The pop‑up reportedly warns that uploaded archives will be stored in the user’s Gemini Activity and may be used to improve Google’s models, language that makes data‑use practices central to the feature’s acceptability. Multiple outlets independently reproduced or reported on these findings, and several attempts to trigger the import flow in ordinary accounts returned no visible control, indicating the feature is behind a flag or staged rollout.

---

What the reported importer looks like (hands‑on summary)​

• The control appears in Gemini’s plus/attachment menu as “Import AI chats,” with a beta badge.
• Activating it opens a pop‑up that: (a) explains the user must download an export from the other service first, and (b) asks the user to upload that archive to Gemini for ingestion. ([androidauthority.com](Switching to Gemini from another chatbot may soon get much easier that the imported content will show up in Gemini Activity and may be used for model training unless explicit non‑training options are present. Early screenshots include that warning language but do not show granular opt‑outs.
• The importer looks like an upload/ingest model (user downloads and uploads), not an authenticated account‑to‑account transfer — a pragmatic early implementation that minimizes cross‑service integration complexity but places more burden on the user.

These observations are consistent across multiple reports; however, because the UI is currently flagged and not broadly visible, the precise file formats, supported source services, and fidelity guarantees remain unannounced. Android Authority, Android Central, and other outlets all trace their reporting back to TestingCatalog’s discovery and independent screenshots.

---

How the import flow would work (practical step sequence)​

Reportedly the workflow is:

• In your source assistant (for example, ChatGPT or Claude), request an export of your conversation history.
• Download the export archive to your device when the source service delivers it (commonly a ZIP with JSON and/or HTML artifacts for services that support exports).
• Open Gemini, select Attach / + → Import AI chats, and upload the downloaded archive.
• Gemini ingests the archive and reconstructs threads inside the user’s activity, attempting timestamps, and attachments where possible.
• The importer displays warnings about storage and possible use for model improvement; the user must confirm to complete ingestion.

This is the flow described in leaked UI assets and reporting; it aligns with the export formats that some services already provide (OpenAI’s ChatGPT export, for example, produces a ZIP that includes a conversations.json and HTML files), which makes the implementation plausible from a technical perspective. That said, the importer’s success hinges on how tolerant Gemini’s parser is of varied archive schemas and on whether it can reliably reconstruct complex, branched threads.

---

What’s verifiable, and what remains speculative​

Verified or strongly corroborated:

• The presence of an “Import AI chats” control in some Gemini test builds and screenshots. Multiple outlets reproduced the same UI elements.
• The modal instructing users to download exports from othed them into Gemini.
• Google is also testing higher‑resolution image exports (2K/4K) and a “Likeness” setting that currently links to a Video Verification page — both observed in the same builds. The purpose of Likeness is not fully specified in the screenshots.

Unverified or uncertain:

• A definitive list of supported source assistants and accepted file formats (the leaks do not enumerate a formal comstingcat
• Whether imported content will be excluded from model training by default, and if so, whether that opt‑out will be per‑importted to paid/enterprise tiers. The pop‑up language seen in leaks suggests the imported data will be stored in Activity and may be used for training; specifics are unconfirmed.
• Any enterprise‑grade admin controls, audit logs, or DLP integrations at launch — these are features enterprises will likely demand but are not present in the leaked UI.

Because this feature is under active testing, any public rollout will be the single source of truth for supported platforms, file schemas, and data‑use choices. Until then, treat the current eaks rather than final product claims.

---

Fidelity is the linchpin: technical challengesmporter nominally parsing chat archives must solve multiple problems to be practically useful:​

• Format variability: Export schemas differ. ChatGPT exports often include JSON + HTML. Claude, Copilot, and other assistants may use different structures. A robust importer must accept multiple schemas or provide a tolerant n Chronology and threading: Long conversations can fork, include nested replies, or contain simultaneous branches. The importer must preserve timestamps, role labels (user/assistant/system), and thread boundaries to avoid flattening structure into an unusable blob.
• System prompts and hidden metadata: Power users rely on system messages (pinned personas, system directives). Some exports include those implicitly; others hide them. Losing this metadata will change assistant behavior after import.
• Multimodal media handling: Exports may reference files (images, PDFs) by filename rather than embedding binaries. The importer must rehost or reattach binarie clear failure reports when media can’t be recovered.
• Size and performance: Large archives (many GBs) require resumable uploads and background ingestion with progress reporting so user sessions don’t hang during import.
• Security of parsers: Malformed HTML oedia in exported archives could be an attack vector. Import parsers must be sandboxed, input‑validated, and scanned for malicious content prior to ingestion.

If Gemini’s importer fails on any of these fronts, the useade to “archive dumping” rather than seamless continuation. Conversely, if Google invests in robust parsing, provenance metadata, and a reconstruction report that highlights what couldn’t be recovered, the importer will deliver real value.

---

P legal exposure — the hard tradeoffs​

The leaked modal language that imported archives will be stored in Gemini Activity and could be used to train models is the most consequential single detail. It transforms an apparent convenience feature into a data governance decision with immediate legal and compliance implications.
Key concerns:

• Sensitivt exports frequently contain PII, PHI, API keys, credentials, or business‑confidential information. If imports are stored and used for training, organizations could unwittingly feed proprietary or regulated data into model training sets.
• Consent and transparency: Users and admins must be shown clear, granular choices before import — including whether the content will be used for training and how long it will be retained. Ambiguous language will erode trust and likely block enterprise adoption.
• Contractual guarantees: Enterprises will demand non‑training clauses and audit trails for imports on paid tiers. Without contractual assurances, many IT teams will simply block imports or require sanitized exports.
• Copyright and third‑party data: Imported archives may contain copyrighted material, third‑party content, or licensing constraints. Accepting and processies the destination platform to potential copyright and licensing claims.

Regulators may view an import feature that enables cross‑platform movement of user data positively in principle (data portability is a recognized consumer right), but the mechanics — especially when the destination reserves ted content for training — will attract scrutiny under data‑protection laws and contract frameworks. Organizations in regulated verticals (healthcare, finance, defense) will treat imports as potential exfiltration unless strict controls exist.

---

Enterprise perspective: must‑have governance before adoption​

If you manage AI usage in a corporate environment, the most important requirements for any importer are non‑training guarantees, admin controls, auditability, and integrated DLP. Enterprises should insist on the following minimum features before allowing tenant‑wide or unmanaged imports:

• Per‑import and per‑tenant non‑training options (contracted for paid plans).
• Admin approval workflows and role‑based controls to restrict who can import what.
• Full audit logs with metadata (who exported, who source platform).
• Pre‑import DLP scanning and quarantine workflows for archives containing PII or credentials.
• Provenance metadata retention (original timestamps, original assistant identifiers).
• Reconstruction reports showing mismatches, missing media, and format errors.

Absent these governance primitives, IT policy should treat imported archives as high‑risk artifacts and require central scanning and redaction prior to upload. The recommended safe path for enterprises is centralized export/import under compliance oversight, never individual free‑for‑all uploads.

---

Security risks and hardening recommendations​

Import parsers represent a real attack surface. Practical mitigations Google (or any platform offering import) should implement include:

• Strong input validation and sandboxed parsing pipelines that never interpret uploaded HTML or run embedded scripts.
• Antivirus/malware scanning of uploaded archives and media blobs before ingestion.
• Size limits, rate limiting, and resumable uploads to avoid denial‑of‑service vectors.
• Automatic redaction tools that detect potential secrets (API keys, private certificates) and either remove or flag them for manual review.
• A “local import” or client‑side parsing option that never uploads content to servers for sensitive imports — usable for users who want continuity without server storage or training exposure.

These are engineering best practices; implementation details will determine whether imports are a productivity boon or a security liability.

---

Likeness, video verification, and image export improvements: what else surfaced​

Testers also found a “Likeness” entry in Gemini settings that currently redirects to a Video Verification page. The precise scope of this control is unclear from leaks, but the name and destination imply early work on identity or provenance tools for synthetic video — an area of rising concern as AI‑generated media proliferates. Treat the reported purpose as speculative until Google provides official docs.
Separately, Gemini’s image exports appear to be gaining higher‑resolution presets: 2K and 4K download options labeled for “Best for Sharing” and “Best for Print.” For creators and designers, higher‑fidelity downloads are useful, but real production readiness will require independent checks on color profiles, compression artifacts, and print proofs.

---

Practical guidance: how to prepare and how to import safely (user checklist)​

If you plan to try chat import when the feature rolls out, follow this safety checklist to reduce risk:

• Export selectively. Prefer single‑thread or date‑range exports rather than full‑account archives.
• Sanitize locally. Inspect the conversations.json or exported HTML and remove credentials, tokens, or client details.
• Run a local DLP/secret‑scanner on the archive before upload to catch API keys or PII.
• Test with a small subset first. Verify how Gemini reconstructs threads and whether attachments are recovered.
• Prefer non‑training options. If the UI offers a “do not use for training” toggle, use it for sensitive data; if none exists, avoid uploading regulated content.
• For enterprise users, route exports through central compliance and require admin approval for imports. Keep an audit trail of every import action.
• Keep originals encrypted and backed up until you confirm import fidelity and retention policies.

Following these steps protects both your productivity and your legal/compliance posture.

---

Strategic implications: why Google would build this, and why rivals must respond​

Portability is a direct lever on switching costs. For Google, enabling users to bring their conversational histories into Gemini reduces friction for adoption and amplifies Gemini’s advantage across Chrome, Android, and Workspace. That strategic logic explains why Google would prioritize an importer even as it balances the governance headaches.
For competitors, the feature raises the bar: market dynamics will favor assistants that provide export APIs and well‑documented, portable schema formats. If portability becomes expected, vendors will compete on features, safety, and integrations rather than relying on contextual lock‑in to retain users. Regulators will watch the space closely because data portability intersectsdata policies in ways that affect consumers and enterprises alike.

---

Bottom line: promise, but execution will decide whether this helps or harms​

The idea of importing chat histories into Gemini is straightforward and powerfully useful in principle: it solves a real pain point for users who treat chats as long‑lived workspaces. Early reporting and screenshots make the feature’s intent clear, and the export/upload flow is technically feasible because several major assistants already offer archival exports.
But the devil is in the details. Fidelity of reconstruction, handling of multimodal media, the security posture of the import parser, and — above altrols around training‑data usage will determine whether the importer becomes a productivity enabler or a governance liability. Enterprises should demand non‑training contractual guarantees and admin controls. Individual users should sanitize archives and prefer non‑training import modes where possible.
If Google ships a carefully engineered importer with granular privacy choices, robust provenance metadata, and enterprise governance primitives, Gemini could materially lower the switching cost for serious users and accelerate a healthier, more portable multi‑assistant ecosystem. If Google ships a simple upload‑and‑ingest tool without strong safeguards, the feature may still be convenient for casual use but will likely be unusable for enterprise or for anyone handling sensitive information.
For now, the feature remains in beta testing in limited builds; watch for Google’s official documentation and rollout notes to learn the final scope, supported sources, accepted file formats, and, crucially, the precise data‑use and training opt‑out mechanics.

---

Conclusion
Gemini’s “Import AI chats” test is one of the clearest signs yet that portability — not just model capability — is the next battleground for assistant platforms. It promises real gains for continuity and user choice, but it exposes substantial privacy, legal, and security tradeoffs that must be resolved before broad adoption. Users and enterprises should prepare policies, sanitation workflows, and contractual requirements now, because when Google flips this feature to general availability, the ability to migrate months or years of conversational work will be a tectonic change for how people organize AI‑assisted work.

---

Source: Zee News Google Gemini may allow users to import chats from ChatGPT, Claude, Grok, Microsoft Copilot, and other AI services: How to import