zlacker

>>isodev+(OP)
edit: I'm retracting my earlier comment. Earlier I wrote that the headline didn't seem to match what was in the TOS, since OP never mentioned which part they're concerned about.

I'm now assuming the part they don't like is §10.4(ii):

> 10.4 Customer License Grant. You agree to grant and hereby grant Zoom a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, sublicensable, and transferable license and all other rights required or necessary to redistribute, publish, import, access, use, store, transmit, review, disclose, preserve, extract, modify, reproduce, share, use, display, copy, distribute, translate, transcribe, create derivative works, and process Customer Content and to perform all acts with respect to the Customer Content: [...] _(ii) for the purpose of product and service development, marketing, analytics, quality assurance, machine learning, artificial intelligence, training, testing, improvement of the Services, Software, or Zoom’s other products, services, and software, or any combination thereof_

Notice that 10.4(ii) says they can use Customer Content "for ... machine learning, artificial intelligence, training", which is certainly allowing training on user content.

>>jxf+6f
But it is saying that your customer content may be used for training AI, in 10.4:

> 10.4 Customer License Grant. You agree to grant and hereby grant Zoom a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, sublicensable, and transferable license and all other rights required or necessary to redistribute, publish, import, access, use, store, transmit, review, disclose, preserve, extract, modify, reproduce, share, use, display, copy, distribute, translate, transcribe, create derivative works, and process Customer Content and to perform all acts with respect to the Customer Content: (i) as may be necessary for Zoom to provide the Services to you, including to support the Services; (ii) for the purpose of product and service development, marketing, analytics, quality assurance, machine learning, artificial intelligence, [...]

>>jsnell+9h
Wow. I hope the op just didn’t read that far.

>>j45+Qh
hitting "search" in your browser and typing "artificial intelligence" doesn't really require reading the whole thing ;)

>>TheRea+4x
Seemed odd that there was so much details refuting it on the points prior to 10.4

Maybe its just a coincidence.

Or maybe it’s two angles perfectly coinciding.