[unityByFreedom]

In the bit about the "now-former employee", it sounds like they admit they banned accounts hosting meetings about Tiananmen Square.

> During the time this individual was employed by Zoom, he took actions resulting in the termination of several meetings in remembrance of Tiananmen Square and meetings involving religious and/or political activities, some of which were hosted by non-China-based users. We terminated the host accounts associated with certain of these meetings.

And about sharing information on dissidents with the government,

> While the complaint alleges that the former employee obtained Zoom account and user IDs associated with the Xinjiang region of China, our investigation shows that this data was anonymized, and at this time we do not have reason to believe that it was shared with the Chinese government.

This is hard to believe given how difficult it is to operate any company in China without very close ties with the CCP.

[dx87]

IIRC, the banning accounts part isn't new info. They were called out for it and I think their reasoning was that at the time they didn't have a way to just block certain regions from a meeting, so they banned the meetings altogether because people from China were joining them, and they wanted to stay on the CCPs good side.

[wbl]

This indictment shows that was a pack of lies. This wasn't corporate policy working through regular channels.

[yorwba]

The complaint by the DOJ alleges that

> Jin and his co-conspirators fabricated evidence of TOS violations to provide justification for terminating the meetings, as well as certain participants’ accounts. Jin then tasked a high-ranking employee of Company-1 in the United States to effect the termination of meetings and the suspension and cancellation of user accounts.

Which does sound like corporate policy working through regular channels, but those channels were compromised.

[unityByFreedom]

It's not regular US corporate policy to operate at the behest of the Chinese government.

[yorwba]

It is for US companies operating in China.

In any case, it appears that the fabricated evidence was intended to suggest to the employee in charge of terminating accounts that the targeted users were violating US law in addition to Chinese law.

[unityByFreedom]

It is not normal for a US company to share data with a foreign government and hide that from the public.