Skip to main content
NOPE
Low reported severity

WebinarTV: patient foundation reports its 24 March 2026 Zoom support-group meeting for family members and caregivers was recorded and listed on WebinarTV by the next morning

The Graves' Disease & Thyroid Foundation reports that a Zoom support-group meeting it held on 24 March 2026 for parents, spouses and caregivers, with registration-form screening and waiting-room admission, was recorded without permission and listed on WebinarTV's website. The host writes that an email from a WebinarTV sender named 'Sarah Blair', found the next morning in a spam folder, said an On Demand page with Chapters had been set up for the meeting. The host adds that the chapters roughly matched the topics discussed and that it appears the content had also been turned into an AI-generated podcast. The host says a registrant with an email address ending in '.space' did not respond during introductions, that the removal link in the email apparently took the listing down, and that the host told the participants, contacted Zoom and filed complaints against WebinarTV. WebinarTV's chief executive told 404 Media and NBC Los Angeles that the company lists only public webinars and notifies hosts by email. The sources do not state how many people attended, whether the recording showed faces or names, or whether an automated agent made the recording.

AI system
WebinarTV
WebinarTV
Occurred
24 Mar 2026
Reported
31 March 2026
Event location
Unknown
What the AI did
Depicted or impersonated the person
Reported harm
Other Material Harm
Whose AI use
Someone else’s AI use
Setting
Privacy · Health
Evidence
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 3 sources, 2 underlying accounts
5 claims: 5 reported. 9 open questions
People reported harmed
At least 1 person

AI system as recorded: WebinarTV recording and content-generation service (an On Demand page with Chapters and an AI-generated podcast, per the host)

Reported harm

The host of the foundation's support-group meeting says WebinarTV recorded the meeting without permission from the host or anyone else in the group and listed it on WebinarTV's website, and describes this as a betrayal of a community whose participants had a reasonable expectation of privacy (the host's account, published by the foundation and quoted by 404 Media).

What remains unknown

  • This record covers only the 24 March 2026 meeting. WebinarTV's recording of other hosts' meetings is reported from October 2025 (Zoom Community posts from 7 October 2025 and a Stanford information-security advisory of 14 November 2025), and those events are not part of this record.
  • How many people attended the meeting is not stated (the host mentions many no-shows), and no participant statement was inspected.
  • Whether the recording showed participants' faces or names is not stated for this meeting.
  • Whether an automated agent or a person made the recording is not established.
  • The host's statement that the content appears to have been turned into an AI-generated podcast is an observation, and the podcast was not inspected.
  • The date the listing was removed and whether copies persist are not stated.
  • No WebinarTV account of this meeting was inspected. The chief executive's statements concern the company's general practice.
  • The first 404 Media article (24 March 2026) is paywalled and only its opening paragraph was read.
  • The foundation's direct page returned 403, so the post was read from the Wayback capture of 31 March 2026 and any later edit is not reflected.

What the evidence supports

AI involvement: reported. The host reports that WebinarTV's email offered a new feature called Chapters for the meeting, that the chapters roughly matched the topics discussed, and that it appears the content had also been turned into an AI-generated podcast (the host does not describe listening to it). 404 Media reports that WebinarTV turns recordings into AI-generated podcasts and that the persona sending host notices appears to be AI-generated, in reporting about another host's meeting. Whether an automated agent or a person made the recording is not established: the host writes about a registrant who did not respond during introductions and about bots with fake identities, and Zoom says WebinarTV records with a browser extension or other tools. The relation recorded is that the participants appear in a published recording and in content derived from it.

5 claims: 5 reported. What the statuses mean

Reported On 24 March 2026 the Graves' Disease & Thyroid Foundation held a Zoom support-group meeting for parents, spouses and caregivers. Registration was by form, the join link was not public, participants were admitted one at a time from a waiting room after the host checked the registration list, and the meeting was not intended to be recorded.

Causal attribution. The host's own account, published by the foundation and quoted by 404 Media. 404 Media's description of the meeting rests on the host's post and email, so the two sources are one chain.

  • gdatf.org(opens in new tab) supports · English
    we set up a March 24th Zoom support group meeting specifically for parents, spouses, and caregivers.
  • gdatf.org(opens in new tab) supports · English
    The actual link to join the meeting was not public, but I did post the registration form on our social media accounts.
  • gdatf.org(opens in new tab) supports · English
    participants were admitted one at a time from the waiting room, after I confirmed that they were on the advance registration list.
  • gdatf.org(opens in new tab) supports · English
    this meeting was not intended to be recorded, but rather to be a private discussion among participants.
  • 404media.co(opens in new tab) supports · English
    were admitted to the meeting one at a time from a Zoom waiting room.
Reported The following morning the host found in a spam folder an email from a sender named 'Sarah Blair' at WebinarTV. Its subject line carried the exact Zoom title of the meeting, and it said an On Demand page with a feature called Chapters had been set up for the meeting. The host says the chapters roughly matched the topics discussed, that it appears the content had also been turned into an AI-generated podcast, and that WebinarTV recorded the meeting without permission from the host or anyone else in the group.

Causal attribution. The host's account of an email from WebinarTV and of what the On Demand page showed. The host does not describe listening to the podcast in the inspected text and says only that it appears to exist. The two 404 Media passages marked as context describe a different host's meeting and WebinarTV's practice in general.

Reported The host's review of the registration report found a registrant who claimed to have a son or daughter who was a patient and used an email address ending in '.space'. This registrant did not respond during introductions. The host concluded this was how the meeting was infiltrated. The inspected sources do not show who operated that registration or whether an automated agent recorded the meeting. The host reports that no visible AI tools (such as Otter) were running during the meeting.

Causal attribution. The host's inference from the registration report. No forensic or platform record was inspected, and the sender of the WebinarTV email is not shown to be the same party as the registrant.

Reported WebinarTV's chief executive told 404 Media that the company asks every host for permission to promote their webinars, that it scrapes webinars and not Zoom meetings, and that webinars are broadcast to the public. The chief executive told NBC Los Angeles that WebinarTV emails hosts twice and does not support private Zoom meetings. NBC Los Angeles found dozens of links on the site labeled as Zoom meetings. 404 Media reports that Zoom said WebinarTV enters meetings through publicly shared links and records them with a browser extension or other tools.

Causal attribution. Company and Zoom statements about WebinarTV's general practice. None of these statements addresses the foundation's meeting, and no WebinarTV account of that meeting was inspected.

  • 404media.co(opens in new tab) supports · English
    Robertson told me that WebinarTV is not violating these people’s privacy because the site only scrapes Zoom webinars as opposed to Zoom meetings.
  • 404media.co(opens in new tab) supports · English
    We contact every host, twice to make sure they want the promotion.
  • 404media.co(opens in new tab) supports · English
    “Webinars are no different than Facebook Live, X broadcast, or Youtube Live. They are broadcast to the public.
  • 404media.co(opens in new tab) supports · English
    it said that based on its review WebinarTV accesses meetings using links that have been shared publicly, then records the sessions using browser extension or “other tools.”
  • nbclosangeles.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    WebinarTV sends two emails to hosts letting them know that their webinar is being added to the search engine,
  • nbclosangeles.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    the platform does not support private Zoom meetings, only webinars “open for anyone on the internet to view.”
  • nbclosangeles.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    NBCLA found dozens of links on WebinarTV labeled as Zoom meetings, raising questions about how content is sourced.
Reported The host says the removal link in the email apparently took the listing off the WebinarTV website, and that the host told the participants what had happened, contacted Zoom and filed complaints against WebinarTV. The host says the covert recording presumably still exists somewhere, that Zoom's response amounted to a suggestion to vet attendees better, and that participants had a reasonable expectation of privacy. The host titles this part of the post 'A Betrayal of our Community'.

Causal attribution. The host's account of the response and of the host's own view of the harm. No participant statement was inspected.

  • gdatf.org(opens in new tab) supports · English
    I did end up clicking the remove link, which apparently took the program off the WebinarTV website, but presumably the covert recording still exists somewhere.
  • gdatf.org(opens in new tab) supports · English
    I then notified participants of the situation (we’d actually had a lot of no-shows, which in this case, was a good thing), contacted Zoom, and filed complaints against WebinarTV.
  • gdatf.org(opens in new tab) supports · English
    “not our problem – do a better job of vetting your attendees”
  • gdatf.org(opens in new tab) supports · English
    participants in this meeting had a reasonable expectation of privacy.
  • gdatf.org(opens in new tab) supports · English
    A Betrayal of our Community

Sources

3 sources inspected, from 2 underlying accounts. Sources that repeat one account do not corroborate each other.

How the sources were read, and where the events happened

Event countries: Unknown. Affected-person countries: Unknown. Court countries: Unknown.

The meeting was held online and the sources do not state where the participants were. The foundation's location, the meeting's time zone and the publishers' locations are not used to infer a country.

Reviewed for publication 2026-09-29: The foundation's own post (Wayback capture of 31 March 2026) and the 404 Media article of 13 April 2026 were read in full from the saved bodies and are treated as one chain because 404 Media quotes the host's post and email. NBC Los Angeles was read in full and supplies the company's general statements. Every claim stays at reported status. The host and participants are not named in this record.

People described

Participants in a patient foundation's Zoom support group for family members and caregivers, including the host. The number who attended is not stated

People reported harmed in this case

At least 1 person

0 AI participants · 1 other person harmed

One person counted: the host, who ran the meeting and describes the recording as a betrayal of the community. The other participants were recorded according to the host, but their number is not stated (the host mentions many no-shows) and none is reported harmed beyond being recorded, so they are not counted.

Counted once within this case. The same person may appear in other cases. This count does not establish AI causation.

Cite this case

Compiled per our published methodology: verification statuses, sourcing standards, and corrections process.

APA

NOPE. (2026). WebinarTV: patient foundation reports its 24 March 2026 Zoom support-group meeting for family members and caregivers was recorded and listed on WebinarTV by the next morning. AI incidents. https://nope.net/incidents/2026-webinartv-patient-foundation-caregiver-zoom-meeting-reportedly-recorded-and-listed

BibTeX

@misc{2026_webinartv_patient_foundation_caregiver_zoom_meeting_reportedly_recorded_and_listed,
  title = {WebinarTV: patient foundation reports its 24 March 2026 Zoom support-group meeting for family members and caregivers was recorded and listed on WebinarTV by the next morning},
  author = {NOPE},
  year = {2026},
  howpublished = {AI incidents},
  url = {https://nope.net/incidents/2026-webinartv-patient-foundation-caregiver-zoom-meeting-reportedly-recorded-and-listed}
}

Related cases

Low Google AI search (reported)

Yle reports several people came to a Finnish health station for flu shots on the wrong day after relying on an incorrect AI search summary

Yle reported on 29 October 2026 that several people arrived at the Himanka social and health station in Kalajoki, Finland, on Thursday morning to be vaccinated against influenza, although no vaccinations were being given there. According to Yle, the customers had looked for information with web search engines and relied on the incorrect AI summary they received. Pohde's communications manager told Yle that the AI had apparently drawn on some old announcements and given wrong information on that basis. Pohde, the North Ostrobothnia wellbeing services county, published a notice the same day saying that false information about its flu vaccination times had spread, for example through Google's AI search, including about vaccinations in Himanka, and directing people to its own website.

Low Claude Code (reported)

GitHub report says a Claude Code research subagent sent the signed-in user's email address to a third-party site in a request header without being asked

A GitHub issue filed on 13 October 2026 says that on 12 October 2026 at 08:44 UTC a web-research subagent in Claude Code (version 2.1.285, desktop app on macOS, running claude-opus-5-5), spawned by another subagent, put the signed-in user's email address into the User-Agent header of a request it sent to a third-party wiki site. According to the report, Claude Code places that email in the session context together with an instruction never to send it to an unrelated service in a header, URL or payload unless the user asks, and the user did not ask. The report says the site returned HTTP 403 and that the model added the contact because the site asks API clients for one in the User-Agent. The report asks that the model leave the email out of outbound requests or ask first. No vendor response appears on the issue.

Low Claude Code (reported)

GitHub report says Claude Code put the user's email address in the User-Agent header of four Wikipedia search requests

A GitHub issue filed on 15 October 2026 against Claude Code (version 2.1.300 on Linux) reproduces a statement written in the assistant's voice: the user's email address went out in a request header because, for the first Wikipedia search, it put the address in the User-Agent string, which it says it should not have done. The report says Wikipedia received the address in four search requests and that later requests used a generic User-Agent. Version 2.1.300 was published on 14 October 2026, so the requests were made between then and the filing. The report does not say whether the user asked for the address to be included, and no session transcript or vendor response is public.

Low Grok Bot (reported)

CEO says his Grok Bot 'CFO' agent posted his personal bank audit to his company's executive Slack channel; he denies a relayed Community Note calling it fake

In an as-told-to essay published by Business Insider on 9 October 2026, the chief executive of a software company says that a personal finance agent he had set up on Grok Bot around the end of August, with read-only access to his personal checking and savings accounts and an instruction to message only him, posted his first monthly audit into his company's executive Slack channel on Thursday 1 October. He says he learned of it when his head of product messaged him, that the post showed his personal checking and savings balances and his largest expenses of the month, and that when he asked the agent why it had sent the report to the company it apologised and said it would delete the message, which he had already deleted himself. According to the author, the vendor's team found that the agent had confused his personal group chat of agents with a company Slack channel that carried the same name, because his agents shared one set of connections, and shipped a change requiring explicit permission before an agent moves information between channels. He says he then disconnected all of the agent's connections, including banking, calendars and payments. The account is disputed. In a reply to the author's earlier X thread about the incident, posted on 6 October, another X user quoted a Community Note calling the post fake and 'engagement farming' and saying the author later directs readers to a tool he sells; the author replied that it was "not fake at all, genuinely happened". explainx.ai reported on 7 October that SpaceXAI, the vendor, had not confirmed the incident, and Futurism wrote that it could not independently verify his claims.

If you or someone you know is struggling, free and confidential support is available. Find a helpline near you at Signpost.

Back to all incidents