Bah. I'm nominally on the side of Zoom, supporting their decision to put end-to-end encryption only in their paid tier, but Matthew makes some compelling points here.
Nothing is "free". If somebody is offering a free product, they are expecting to get paid somehow. Saying Zoom's encryption needs to be free is like saying VPNs need to be free. Free VPNs are harvesting your data for $$$.
Zoom's free tier is therefore intended as the first step to get people to pay. From a pure business point of view, costs vs. benefits, what does end-to-end encryption lead to? If it results in more paying customers, then add it. If it only results in more costs, remove it.
But as Matthew points out, such business decisions aren't made in a vacuum. Part of the costs and benefits comes from a (somewhat corrupt) government policy toward end-to-end encryption.
As a rabid libertarian, I'm all for defending business decisions. But there's good reason to believe this isn't solely a business decision.
