Last week, Michelle Gills of Willits, California, filed a lawsuit against Patagonia for leveraging Talkdesk’s contact center AI tools.
The AI tools – which include Talkdesk Customer Experience Analytics, Quality Management, and Agent Assist - are nothing new, with most other big-name CCaaS providers offering similar solutions.
Crucially, however, Gills claims that – without her knowledge or consent - Talkdesk leverages these tools to "intercept, listen to, record, and use the contents of the call."
Instead, she expected Patagonia – a global clothing retailer - to keep her conversations confidential.
As such, Gills submitted the Class Action Complaint, accusing Patagonia of two violations of the California Invasion of Privacy Act, an invasion of privacy under California’s constitution, and an intrusion upon seclusion.
CX Today revealed the news last week. Yet, now CX analysts have digested the case, several have shared their thoughts on how the lawsuit – and the potential for others – could change the nature of CCaaS vendor-customer relationships forever.
→ THE LAWSUIT: Read the lawsuit here.
A Ginormous Wake-Up Call for CCaaS Vendors
Talkdesk and many other CCaaS vendors use the content of their customers' calls to train their AI. That's no industry secret. After all, many market their AI models on how many millions (or billions) of customer conversations have trained them.
Several CX analysts - like Liz Miller, VP & Principal Analyst at Constellation Research – have long taken issue with this. At industry events, they’ve asked vendors: "What do you mean it’s your data being used to train the AI?"
Their response: "Our customers opt-in."
While that might be true, in California – alongside Europe, thanks to GDPR – it's not all about the customer; it's also about their customer's customers and their right to say no.
Noting this, Miller said: "For a lot of these vendors, this lawsuit should be a ginormous wake-up call.
They’ve got to stop thinking that, just because someone filled out a form and then hit submit, they can use that data to train their AI. That’s just not how it works.
Indeed, these CCaaS providers must now consider: how many of our customers are going to get sued? Because Talkdesk didn't get sued, its customer did.
End-Users: Start Asking Your CCaaS Vendors Some Uncomfortable Questions
Overall, this is a nuanced lawsuit. But, in itself, it won't necessarily put the onus on regulators to create new policies that guide the actions of CX tech providers.
What it may start to do, however, is influence the way brands and vendors work together to ensure the former has a sufficient layer of transparency.
"It has to put a requirement on someone – maybe Debbie and Bob from risk and compliance – to have a very uncomfortable conversation with their vendors," said Miller.
It puts the onus on where it should have always been: on the buyer and the seller to ask those hard questions.
Rebecca Wetteman, CEO & Principal Analyst at Valoir, agreed, stating: "We’re going to see more lawsuits like this... I think it’s just the tip of the iceberg."
She also warns that an IVR message – such as "the call is being recorded for training purposes" - will not be enough to protect end-users, as the California legislation dives much deeper.
Indeed, those end-users may also have to include information such as where the contact data is being rerouted, whether it's being held at a different site, and so on. All in all, that will likely result in a long and somewhat confronting in-queue message for consumers to listen to.
CCaaS Vendors: Urgently Review Your Customer Testimonials!
As the Patagonia lawsuit does the rounds, CCaaS providers must prepare to engage in those difficult discussions, ensuring a uniform, carefully considered response.
Yet, first things first, vendors should sweep their websites, reconsider any materials that may give ammunition to such cases, and protect their customers.
After all, in the lawsuit, the plaintiff points to a case study on Talkdesk’s website and references the retailer’s Senior Manager of Customer Experience Operations by name.