Indiana Joins the Multi-State Legal Action Against Meta

The United States v Meta Platforms Court Filing October 24, 2023 is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This is part 63 of 100. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here 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. Continue Reading . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case 4:23-cv-05448 retrieved on October 25, 2023, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. Washingtonpost.com

Indiana Joins the Multi-State Legal Action Against Meta

About Author

Comments

TOPICS

THIS ARTICLE WAS FEATURED IN

Related Stories

Untitled Story

Oregon's Legal Battle with Meta Intensifies: UTPA Violations Highlighted

Meta in the Legal Crosshairs: Indiana State Claims Deceptive Acts, Seeks Accountability

Behind the Metrics: Meta's Safety Claims Challenged in Colorado Consumer Protection Suit

Delaware DTPA Battle: Attorney General Accuses Meta of Misleading Conduct and Violations

Facebook Does Not Obtain Verifiable Parental Consent Before Collecting Personal Information

Oregon's Legal Battle with Meta Intensifies: UTPA Violations Highlighted

Meta in the Legal Crosshairs: Indiana State Claims Deceptive Acts, Seeks Accountability

Behind the Metrics: Meta's Safety Claims Challenged in Colorado Consumer Protection Suit

Delaware DTPA Battle: Attorney General Accuses Meta of Misleading Conduct and Violations

Facebook Does Not Obtain Verifiable Parental Consent Before Collecting Personal Information

Light-Mode

Classic

Newspaper

Dark-Mode

Neon Noir

Minty

HN StartUps