One button, one accusation

Istokovicsgyorgy says Google AI Studio's delete button does not delete anything. He is preparing legal action on the strength of what he calls unassailable software logic.

What the button actually does

Pressing delete moves a single JSON launcher file into his Google Drive trash. No chat object, no backend record, no session state is destroyed.

“All it does is move the launcher file belonging to the user interface, a simple JSON file, into the trash folder of my Google Drive.”

The 30 day disappearing act

Drive trash empties itself after 30 days. Once the JSON is gone, the interface reports no such prompt and the user has no way back into the conversation.

Why that looked airtight

He argues Google counted on the user losing all technical access. With no route into the chat, nobody could ever show the servers still held it.

Google's own robot betrayed it

Drive's file recovery tool is local and blind. It cannot reach remote AI backend servers or rebuild database records, so it can only resurrect the discarded JSON.

“This robot only operates inside the Drive storage and can only resurrect the discarded JSON file.”

The chat came straight back

After emptying the trash, he restored the JSON file. AI Studio loaded the working chat immediately, with its full previous memory and internal state intact.

The checkmate, as he sees it

Since the recovery tool never touched the backend, an instant reload means the backend kept running and storing the conversation the whole time.

“The backend system was never affected by the deletion command.”

No room for a glitch defense

He says Google cannot plead temporary deletion or technical error in court, because the limits of its own recovery tool rule out any other explanation.

The rename is the tell

The button now reads move prompt to trash, your prompt will be permanently deleted after 30 days. He calls the wording a rushed cover for what the code really does.

“It is not the prompt that goes to the trash, but the pointer, the json.”

He warned them first

Before the rename, he raised data retention by email, on the forum, and by physical letter to Google's US address, with signed return receipts from the Hungarian post.

Other users saw it too

A 2025 thread on Google's AI developer forum describes deleted chats still reachable by direct URL, with several users reporting the same behavior.

A Google developer's own words

He cites a Google developer writing that the Drive file is only metadata, so losing it means AI Studio fails to recognize the chat rather than deleting it.

“Due to the loss of the metadata, AI Studio does not recognize the chat, but this is not a deletion.”

Civil law to criminal law

His claim escalates here. Intentional deception plus intentional retention, he argues, moves this out of civil dispute and into criminal territory.

“It is no longer civil law, it is CRIMINAL LAW.”

The video evidence

He posted two YouTube clips, one on PC and one on Android, showing the restored JSON loading a chat the interface had declared gone.

A fight on the forums

He accuses two forum users of a coordinated cross-platform campaign to defame him and mass-report his posts, and demands permanent bans from moderators.

“The permanent archives and cross-platform audit trails do not lie.”

Called a bot, and furious about it

When critics label his posts spam or bot output, he reads it as surrender. His answer: post a factual counter-proof to the backend claims or stop talking.

“A bot didn't find those backend vulnerabilities, I did.”