[u-u] ethical objection to Zoom

[D. Hugh Redelmeier]

| From: Hugh Gamble <hugh at phaedrav.com>

| Google has done the same, only more so, and more often.
| For the same legitimate reasons.
| Anybody considering a boycott of Zoom
| would do better to start boycotting all Google consumer and B2B services.

I'm unaware of anything Google has done that is similar.  I'd be very
interested to learn more.  Can you point to documentation of this?

With regards to China: Google properties are blocked in China.  It
would seem odd for them to conform to Chinese law.

>From the original article:

	In one incident in early June, Zoom deactivated the account of
	Zhou Fengsuo, a leader of the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests
	who now lives in California.

This is not a person in China.  However they later restored it, so
perhaps it was a mistake.

The original article listed two examples of HK residents being
suspended.  HK is not under CN censorship regime (yet).

I don't normally go to the Washington Post website because it is
behind a paywall, but this article doesn't seem to be available:

<https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/zoom-censors-video-talks-on-hong-kong-and-tiananmen-drawing-criticism/2020/06/11/0197dc94-ab90-11ea-a43b-be9f6494a87d_story.html.T-T-T>

>From the WP article:

	In statement, Zoom said it was obliged to respond to requests from 
	Chinese authorities as long as users in China participated in 
	videoconferences.

This is false.  As an ostensibly US company, if they want to provide CN 
service, they must block CN participants in such a meeting but they don't 
need to delete the meeting itself.

The extra-territorial application of PRC's draconian censorship regime
is horrible.  I cannot do much about it but punish the agents that do
this.