Indiana Joins the Multi-State Legal Action Against Meta

COUNT XVIII: UNFAIR OR DECEPTIVE ACTS OR PRACTICES BY META IN VIOLATION OF THE INDIANA DECEPTIVE CONSUMER SALES ACT, IND. CODE § 24-5-0.5-3(a), -3(b)(1), AND -3(b)(2)

961. The State of Indiana realleges and incorporates herein by reference each of the allegations contained in the preceding paragraphs as though fully alleged in this cause of action.

962. The Deceptive Consumer Sales Act (DCSA) regulates unfair, abusive, and/or deceptive acts, omissions, and/or practices between a supplier and consumer when engaging in consumer transactions. Ind. Code § 24-5-0.5 et seq. 963. Under the DCSA, a consumer transaction includes services and other intangibles. Ind. Code § 24-5-0.5-2.

964. In supplying Indiana consumers with products and services, Meta was and remains involved in consumer transactions in Indiana, as defined by Ind. Code § 24-5-0.5-2.

965. Meta regularly engages in or solicits consumer transactions with Indiana consumers. As such, Meta is a supplier pursuant to Ind. Code § 24-5-0.5-2.

966. Meta has engaged in unfair, abusive, and/or deceptive acts, omissions, and/or practices affecting Indiana consumers, in violation of Ind. Code § 24-5-0.5-3(a), in connection with consumers transactions as detailed throughout this Complaint, including but not limited to the misrepresentations, unfair and deceptive acts, omissions and practices identified in Section XI above.

967. Meta has engaged in unfair, abusive, and/or deceptive acts, omissions, and/or practices affecting Indiana consumers, in violation of Ind. Code § 24-5-0.5-3(a), in connection with consumers’ transactions as detailed throughout this Complaint, including but not limited to the conduct in violation of the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, 15 USC § 6501 et seq.; 16 C.F.R. § 312.1 et seq., as set forth in Count I above.

968. Meta has engaged in deceptive acts affecting Indiana consumers in violation of Ind. Code § 24-5-1.5-3(b)(1), by misrepresenting that its products and/or services had performance, characteristics, uses, and/or benefits they did not have, which Meta knew or reasonably should have known that they did not have, as detailed throughout this Complaint, including but not limited to the misrepresentations identified in Section XI(A) above.

969. Meta has engaged in deceptive acts affecting Indiana consumers in violation of Ind. Code § 24-5-1.5-3(b)(2), by misrepresenting that its products and/or services were of a particular standard, quality, grade, style, or model when they were not, and which Meta knew or reasonably should have known they were not, as detailed throughout this Complaint, including but not limited to the misrepresentations identified in Section XI(A) above.

970. Each of Meta’s unfair and deceptive acts, omissions and practices constitutes a separate violation of the DCSA actionable by the Attorney General of the State of Indiana.