It's very likely that they sell that data to the US intelligence community.
One good example is Skype which they bought two years after rumors surfaced [1] that the NSA offered billions for solutions that can wiretap Skype calls. After they've bought it, they removed end to end encryption as well as the peer to peer system, sending all content over Microsoft servers.
It's a bit better if it's "only" shared with the US intelligence community instead of anyone who names a price for it, but obviously still not really good for privacy.
I'm pretty sure Whatsapp/Facetime is P2P for video calling. But I'm not sure about a video conferencing solution i.e. a multi-party/group call. I have a service that sniffs packets going in/out of my home network which maps the remote IP to a registered ASN and the Lat/Lon coordinates. All of my Whatsapp sessions have been tagged with the name of the ISP at the other end and the right position coordinates. Not Facebook's/Apple's.
What? So my self-hosted P2P WebRTC is in violation of a patent? And the companies I set these services up for too? Are all the others (zoom, go-to, uberconf, jitsi, etc) just not doing P2P?
IIRC P2P doesn't scale beyond a few participants because all the streams are going to all participants. Centralized can reduce bandwidth and number of data exchanges
> Apple responded by petitioning the PTO to invalidate these four patents. Through these various proceedings (and others initiated by additional interested parties), the PTO has invalidated every patent claim VirnetX has asserted against Apple, finding all either anticipated or obvious.
One good example is Skype which they bought two years after rumors surfaced [1] that the NSA offered billions for solutions that can wiretap Skype calls. After they've bought it, they removed end to end encryption as well as the peer to peer system, sending all content over Microsoft servers.
It's a bit better if it's "only" shared with the US intelligence community instead of anyone who names a price for it, but obviously still not really good for privacy.
[1]: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/02/12/nsa_offers_billions...