Zoom Class Action Says Virtual Pole Dancing Class Crashed

UPDATE: On Dec. 2, 2020, Zoom filed a motion to dismiss several class action lawsuits filed this year claiming privacy invasions and harm. 

A Texas woman says her online pole dancing and burlesque classes were viewed by “uninvited men” due to a glitch in the popular virtual meeting platform Zoom.

Lead plaintiff Stacey Simins claims that she has been teaching the classes virtually out of her studio since her physical location was closed due to COVID-19 restrictions.

She alleges that, despite paying for a subscription to the videoconferencing service and using an encryption option, her classes were hacked and the hackers harassed her students.

Simins claims that her business is now suffering because of the incidents and that her students do not feel safe using Zoom to attend her classes.

The plaintiff alleges that she purchased and used a paid license for Zoom because the company markets its service as secure.

“Zoom has long marketed the service as being protected with end-to-end, 256-bit encryption, and has emphasized that it takes concrete steps to ensure privacy and security for its users. But in reality, Zoom has failed to deliver private and secure video conferencing,” contends the Zoom class action lawsuit.

“The level of encryption Zoom provides is far less robust than what it promised. And a wide variety of security failings have jeopardized Zoom-users’ privacy. These failings have enabled bad actors to join meetings without permission, to access web cameras surreptitiously, and to access many thousands of recorded Zoom meetings stored online.”

In addition, the Zoom class action lawsuit alleges that the company shares information about its users with Facebook, but fails disclose that practice to users in its privacy policy.

Zoom, a videoconferencing service, has exploded in popularity as restrictions have been placed on in person gatherings due to the coronavirus pandemic. Closures have lead workers, businesses, and even social gatherings to move online.

According to the complaint, the service went from a peak of 10 million calls a day in December 2019 to more than 200 million in March 2020.

All Zoom meetings are held online in meetings offered via “video, voice, chat, and content sharing across mobile devices, desktops, laptops, telephones, and conference room systems.” Users can access a free version of the service or pay up to $19.99 a month for additional features on Zoom, notes the complaint.

“Because of the very nature of Zoom Meetings, users expect and understand that the service comes with privacy and security features,” contends the Zoom class action lawsuit. “Like talking on the phone, communicating by video conference is generally understood to be a private matter.”

The Zoom class action lawsuit adds that users of the service “reasonably expect that their communications will only be heard and seen by those that the users know they are communicating with in the meeting.”

Indeed, alleges the plaintiff, she and other users were drawn into the service based on Zoom’s representations about its security features.

The Zoom class action lawsuit points out numerous statements by the company touting its security standards, along with blog posts. Zoom has allegedly marketed a 256-bit AES encryption system, data sovereignty, as well as security certifications, as features it offers.

According to the Zoom class action lawsuit, the company has a history of telling consumers that it offers end-to-end encryption for Zoom meetings.

However, the recent surge in popularity in the service has exposed security flaws that make the company’s claims of “end to end encryption” untrue, alleges the plaintiff.

Instead, the service offers “transport encryption,” in which Zoom carries the “keys” to the encryption.

True “end to end” encryption, though more technical, is possible, alleges the complaint, and offered through another popular service, Apple’s FaceTime.

According to the Zoom class action lawsuit, a number of media outlets have reported on security issues related to using the service, such as high-level government meetings being held using the video conferencing service.

In addition, the department of one university revealed that Zoom’s encryption level was less than advertised at AES 128-bit, rather than AES 256-bit.

The Zoom class action lawsuit alleges that the videoconferencing service is also subject to a number of other security flaws and misrepresentations that, had the plaintiff and others known, would have affected their decision to purchase licenses to the service.

Simins seeks to represent those who have used Zoom Meetings, as well as a subclass of those who paid for a Zoom license.

According to the complaint, Zoom has violated California consumer protection laws and committed fraud.

The plaintiff is seeking damages as well as a court order “directing Zoom to cease its misrepresentations, cease its unlawful nondisclosures, and to provide improved security and privacy in connection with Zoom Meetings.”

Has your Zoom conference been hacked by unauthorized users? Tell us what happened in the comment section below.

The lead plaintiff and proposed Class Members are represented by Eric H. Gibbs, Andre Mura, Amanda M. Karl and Jeffrey Kosbie of Gibbs Law Group LLP.

The Zoom Security Breach Class Action Lawsuit is Simins v. Zoom Video Communications Inc., Case No. 5:20-cv-02893, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

Read More Lawsuit & Settlement News:

FTC Refunds | April 2020

IED Attacks in Iraq Traced to Big Bank Financing

Amazon Allegedly Used Unfair Data Collecting Methods to Create Products

Research Indicates Mint JUUL Pods, General Sales Up After JUUL Stopped Sale Fruit-Flavored Products