[alexlmiller]

The indemnification for IP is a standard term that exists in all SaaS terms. What it's saying is "if you upload copyrighted/infringing material to our service and someone sues us because of it, you have to pay our legal costs since we had nothing to do with it".

This is a pretty reasonable thing, you're the one who uploaded the material, you're responsible for it, especially since zoom isn't checking/filtering what you upload/share.

[stronglikedan]

I don't think it's reasonable that a SaaS should be able to train their AI on anything that is uploaded (if you're paying for the service). In fact, I don't think it's reasonable that they should even have access to view what you're uploading and sharing in private meetings. If neither of those were true, then they wouldn't have to worry about IP infringement.

[raynr]

> In fact, I don't think it's reasonable that they should even have access to view what you're uploading and sharing in private meetings.

There may be a setting you can set in the application to disable this. I don't know, I don't use Zoom.

But in any case, I think you hit the nail on the head. Just from a plain English perspective:

10.1 says that content you (as host or participant) upload to Zoom, may be used by Zoom to provide derivative information. An example listed is transcripts. Both the information you upload, and the information Zoom provides, is "Customer Content". Customer Content is your responsibility.

10.3 and 10.4 covers a wide variety of purposes for which Zoom can use the Customer Content.

10.5 says that Zoom will reasonably protect Customer Content from unauthorized disclosure, etc., but that it has no other obligations with respect to Customer Content. In particular, it can share the Customer Content with their "consultants,contractors, service providers, subprocessors, and other Zoom-authorized third parties accessing, using, collecting, maintaining, processing, storing, and transmitting Customer Content on Zoom’s or your (or your End Users’) behalf in connection with the Services or Software".

17.1, the confidentiality clause, says that Customer Content is not confidential information. That suggest the obligations of confidentiality, such as disclosing to third parties only with a confidentiality agreement in place, do not apply.

So if I'm reading this right, Zoom can disclose your meeting transcripts [edit: I meant audio of your meeting] to a third party, without an obligation of confidence between Zoom and that third party, so long as it is for the purposes of providing you the transcript feature.

Which is really strange, to say the least. At minimum I would expect Zoom to treat Customer Content as confidential.

Wish a lawyer could read this and give us (free) insight.

[lifeinthevoid]

Zoom End-to-End encryption should theoretically not allow Zoom to see any of the content no?

[screamingninja]

There was a big controversy around Zoom calling it E2E with their server being one of the ends. Not sure what their new narrative is but I do not trust Zoom to do the right thing regardless.

[remram]

Cloudflare does the same thing.

[pipingdog]

I'll go out on a limb and propose that end-to-end encryption and many-to-many real-time multimedia communication are two things that aren't often combined in a single product.

[bigfishrunning]

only if you trust them -- zoom has never had me submit a public key of any kind, so they're in control of all encryption parameters

[tomxor]

> This is a pretty reasonable thing, you're the one who uploaded the material, you're responsible for it

Absolute BS, this isn't youtube, call it what it is... eavesdropping on two way communication for personal gain. They are misusing IP law to cover their arses for stealing information that is legal to share between the people in the call but not legal for them to steal.

Every business should be fleeing from Zoom right now. All your internal comms are going to be exposed to their LLM... if you have trade secrets discussed over zoom calls, you should assume they can be extracted by others with access to the LLM.

[ranting-moth]

It totally stops being a reasonable thing when the content is used to train AI. I don't think you can discuss/use company's IP anymore on a Zoom call. Or at least if you do, zoom's AI will be able to reproduce it and it will be YOUR fault.

[elaus]

It might be a standard term, but this is still a big reason not to use Zoom if you expect that any copyrighted or NDA'ed material will be shared.

Zoom says they might use this data to train their AI. If the AI produces a close-enough copy of copyrighted material or if it spews out company secrets, someone _will_ sue Zoom for this.

[amelius]

It is entirely NOT reasonable to listen in on people's phone calls.

[SoftTalker]

Yep, and also terms are necessary that in so many words allow the SaaS provider to read, process, copy, share, store, redistribute, etc. all your content. This is so they can provide their services, which are basically sharing video, audio, and content amongst the meeting participants, providing meeting recordings, transcriptions, etc.