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 53 of 100. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here COUNT VIII: DECEPTIVE AND UNFAIR ACTS OR PRACTICES BY META IN VIOLATION OF THE COLORADO CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, COLO. REV. STAT. § 6-1-105(1)(rrr) 887. Colorado realleges and incorporates by reference each of the allegations contained in the preceding paragraphs 1 through 850 as though fully alleged in this cause of action. 888. Through the above-described acts and omissions, including but not limited to the acts and omissions described in paragraphs 847 through 850, Meta knowingly and/or recklessly engaged in unfair, unconscionable, deceptive, deliberately misleading, false, and/or fraudulent acts and/or practices. 889. At all relevant times, Meta knew of the mental and physical harms suffered by young users of its Social Media Platforms. Meta deliberately misled consumers regarding these harms and exploited the vulnerabilities of young users to maximize engagement. Such conduct led to, among other things, young users’ compulsive and unhealthy use of, and addiction to, the Social Media Platforms. 890. Meta’s acts and omissions alleged herein offend public policy, fall in the penumbra of conduct generally recognized under common-law theories of products liability, and are immoral, unethical, oppressive, and unscrupulous, including because they constitute knowing decisions causing unnecessary and unjustified harm to young users for Meta’s financial gain. 891. Meta’s acts and omissions alleged herein are also likely to cause, and have caused, substantial injury to consumers that could not be reasonably avoided. Young users could not have reasonably avoided injuries resulting from Meta’s acts and omissions, nor can they do so in the future, for numerous reasons, including but not limited to Meta’s misrepresentations and failure to disclose the dangerous nature of its Social Media Platforms, and Meta’s use of psychologically manipulative engagement-inducing features, knowing that young users are especially susceptible to those features. 892. The deceptive and/or unfair act or practices engaged in by Meta as recited above constitute separate violations of the Colorado Consumer Protection Act. By engaging in the acts and practices alleged herein, both separately and as taken together, Meta violated Colo. Rev. Stat. § 6-1-105(1)(rrr). 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

Meta Accused of Harms to Connecticut Users in Unfair Trade Practices Case

Meta Loves Telling Half-Truths 

Read My Stories

Too Long; Didn't Read

Boost your HackerNoon story @ $159.99! 🚀

Meta's Guide for Growing Engagement—Step 1: Exploit Young Users

About Author

Comments

TOPICS

THIS ARTICLE WAS FEATURED IN

Related Stories

Untitled Story

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

$PEPE, a Purple Lamborghini, and More: The Story Continues

102 Most Important Webism Quotes by Unknown Authors

100 Days of AI Day 3: Leveraging AI for Prompt Engineering and Inference

100 Days of AI, Day 8: Experimenting With Microsoft's Semantic Kernel Using GPT-4

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

$PEPE, a Purple Lamborghini, and More: The Story Continues

102 Most Important Webism Quotes by Unknown Authors

100 Days of AI Day 3: Leveraging AI for Prompt Engineering and Inference

100 Days of AI, Day 8: Experimenting With Microsoft's Semantic Kernel Using GPT-4

Light-Mode

Classic

Newspaper

Dark-Mode

Neon Noir

Minty

HN StartUps