Sure! Except it was mandated by your boss. Or you have a choice between a bunch of offerings with the exact same screwball terms. This might not actually be true for videoconferencing now that it's getting somewhat democratized and competitive.
Point is: "just boilerplate" is just rationalization. An honest person would never present it as comforting and a knowledgeable person would never find it comforting. Of course, the world is full of dishonest people, so it gets used all the time. Hence "lawyerspeak."
Do you refuse to use any other software mandated by your company? What's the difference?
It's standard policy to cover any potential personal data that they might receive. What is your concern exactly? That they shouldn't spell it out? That would be illegal under current data regulations.
Let me tell work that I can't collaborate remotely anymore on video because I am using my agency to refuse to use Zoom even though everyone else at the whole company does. Then they can use their agency to put me on a PIP because my choice hindered my ability to do my job.
I'm sure you realize it's not as easy as you say, but I suppose it's easier to assert that situations don't have nuance because then you can make blanket statements like you did.
Translation: "Yeah, that's one of the parts where we really screw you, but you don't have a choice, lol."