paint-brush
Meta Platforms Face Sweeping Multi-State Legal Action Over Child Safety Violationsby@metaeatsbrains
541 reads
541 reads

Meta Platforms Face Sweeping Multi-State Legal Action Over Child Safety Violations

by Save the Kids From MetaOctober 27th, 2023
Read on Terminal Reader
Read this story w/o Javascript
tldt arrow

Too Long; Didn't Read

The United States v. Meta Platforms court filing, dated October 24, 2023, unveils a monumental legal action by several U.S. states against Meta Platforms. The plaintiffs, including Arizona, California, Colorado, and more, accuse Meta of exploiting young users for profit, violating COPPA regulations, and engaging in deceptive practices. This comprehensive legal battle covers a wide range of claims, potentially impacting the tech giant's future.

People Mentioned

Mention Thumbnail
featured image - Meta Platforms Face Sweeping Multi-State Legal Action Over Child Safety Violations
Save the Kids From Meta HackerNoon profile picture

The United States v. Meta Platforms Court Filing October 24, 2023 is part of HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series. You can jump to any part in this filing here. This is the table of links with all parts.


Case Number: 4:23-cv-05448

Plaintiffs:

State Of Arizona,

The People Of The State Of California;

State Of Colorado,;

State Of Connecticut;

State Of Delaware;

State Of Georgia, Attorney General Of The State Of Georgia;

State Of Hawai‘i, Ex Rel. Anne E. Lopez, Attorney General;

State Of Idaho, Through Attorney General Raúl R. Labrador;

The People Of The State Of Illinois; State Of Indiana;

State Of Kansas, Ex Rel. Kris W. Kobach, Attorney General;

The Commonwealth Of Kentucky;

State Of Louisiana;

State Of Maine; Office Of The Attorney General Of Maryland;

State Of Michigan Ex Rel. Dana Nessel, Attorney General;

State Of Minnesota, By Its Attorney General, Keith Ellison;

State Of Missouri, Ex Rel. Andrew Bailey, Attorney General;

State Of Nebraska Ex Rel. Michael T. Hilgers, Attorney General;

Matthew J. Platkin, Attorney General For The State Of New Jersey, And Cari Fais, Acting Director Of The New Jersey Division Of Consumer Affairs;

The People Of The State Of New York, By Letitia James, Attorney General Of The State Of New York; State Of North Carolina, Ex Rel. Joshua H. Stein, Attorney General;

State Of North Dakota, Ex Rel. Drew Wrigley, Attorney General;

State Of Ohio, Ex Rel. Attorney General Dave Yost;

State Of Oregon Ex Rel. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General For The State Of Oregon;

Commonwealth Of Pennsylvania By Attorney General Michelle A. Henry;

State Of Rhode Island;

State Of South Carolina, Ex. Rel. Alan M. Wilson, In His Official Capacity As Attorney General Of The State Of South Carolina;

State Of South Dakota Ex Rel. Marty J. Jackley, South Dakota Attorney General;

Commonwealth Of Virginia, Ex Rel. Jason S. Miyares, Attorney General;

State Of Washington, Ex Rel. Robert W. Ferguson, Attorney General;

State Of West Virginia, Ex Rel. Patrick Morrisey, Attorney General; And State Of Wisconsin,


Defendant: Meta Platforms

Filing Date: October 24, 2023

Judge: Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers

Location: In the United States District Court for the Northern District of California

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. SUMMARY OF THE CASE

II. PUBLIC INTEREST

III. JURISDICTION, VENUE AND DIVISIONAL ASSIGNMENT

A. Jurisdiction

B. Venue

C. Divisional Assignment.


IV. RELEVANT TIMES

V. PLAINTIFFS

VI. DEFENDANTS

VII. TRADE AND COMMERCE IN THE FILING STATES


VIII. META’S SCHEME TO EXPLOIT YOUNG USERS FOR PROFIT

A. To maximize profit, Meta’s business model focuses on increasing young users’ engagement.

1. Meta monetizes young users’ attention through data harvesting and targeted advertising.

2. Meta specifically targets young users.

3. Meta designs and deploys features to capture young users’ attention and prolong their time on its Social Media Platforms.


B. Meta falsely represents that its Social Media Platform features are safe and not designed to induce young users’ compulsive and extended use.

  1. Meta represents to the public that its Social Media Platforms are designed to support young users’ well-being.

  2. Meta prioritizes maximizing engagement over young users’ safety.

  3. Meta’s Recommendation Algorithms encourage compulsive use, which Meta does not disclose.

  4. The Recommendation Algorithms are harmful to young users’ mental health, notwithstanding Meta’s representations to the contrary.

  5. Meta’s use of social comparison features such as “Likes” also promotes compulsive use and mental health harms for young users.

  6. Meta’s use of disruptive audiovisual and haptic notifications interferes with young users’ education and sleep.

  7. Meta promotes Platform features such as visual filters known to promote eating disorders and body dysmorphia in youth

  8. Meta offers features that it claims promote connection between friends, but actually serve to increase young users’ time spent on the Platform.

  9. Through its Platform features, Meta discourages young users’ attempts to disengage, notwithstanding Meta’s representations to the contrary

  10. Meta knows its Platform features are addictive and harmful, but misrepresents and omits this information in public discourse.

  11. Meta makes its Platforms and associated harmful features available to especially young and vulnerable users.


C. Meta has misled its users and the public by boasting a low prevalence of harmful content on its Social Media Platforms (Redacted)


D. Meta’s Platform features cause young users significant physical and mental harm, of which Meta is keenly aware.


IX. META’S COPPA NONCOMPLIANCE

A. COPPA requires Meta to obtain verifiable parental consent for Instagram and Facebook users under the age of 13

B. Meta does not comply with COPPA with respect to Instagram.

  1. Meta possesses actual knowledge of children on Instagram and collects their personal information without obtaining parental consent.

  2. Instagram is “directed to children.”

    a. Instagram’s audience composition includes millions of users under the age of 13

    b. Advertising that promotes Instagram and appears on Instagram is directed to children

    c. Meta’s design of the Instagram registration process allows children under 13 to use Instagram.

    d. Users under age 13 are an “intended audience” of Instagram.

    e. Subject matter, characters, activities, music, and other content on Instagram are child-oriented.

    f. Models and celebrities on Instagram are children and/or child-oriented.

  3. Meta does not obtain verifiable parental consent before collecting personal information from users under the age of 13 on Instagram.

C. Meta does not comply with COPPA with respect to Facebook.

  1. Meta has actual knowledge of users under age 13 on Facebook.

  2. Facebook is “directed to children.”

  3. Meta does not obtain verifiable parental consent before collecting personal information from users under age 13 on Facebook.


X. META CONTINUES TO EXPAND AND INTRODUCE NEW PLATFORMS

XI. SUMMARY OF META’S DECEPTIVE AND UNFAIR OR UNCONSCIONABLE ACTS AND PRACTICES

A. Deceptive Acts and Practices

B. Unfair and/or Unconscionable Acts and Practices


CLAIMS FOR RELIEF




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 24, 2023, from Washingtonpost.com 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.