Facebook still faces foes to privacy settlement
Parents and childrens advocates are challenging a settlement in a 2011 class-action lawsuit with Facebook, and renewing a battle over teenagers privacy on the worlds largest online social network.
February 19, 2014 at 04:28 AM
6 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Parents and children's advocates are challenging a settlement in a 2011 class-action lawsuit with Facebook, and renewing a battle over teenagers' privacy on the world's largest online social network.
At issue, is how the company uses its cache of information with its 1.23 billion users. According to the Associated Press, Facebook's use of people's images in advertisements known as “sponsored stories” is causing the concern. This allowed companies to pay to retransmit users' activities to their friends' pages. If someone clicked the “like” button for a brand, the click could show up as a “sponsored story” on friends' pages. This allowed companies to pay to retransmit users' activities to their friends' pages. If someone clicked the “like” button for a brand, the click could show up as a “sponsored story” on friends' pages.
“Class-action settlements are supposed to compensate people for wrongdoing and deter the defendant from engaging in the bad behavior in future. This settlement does neither,” said Scott Michelman, the Public Citizen attorney handling the case, in a statement
Last week, the non-profit Public Citizens and six parents of teenagers filed legal brief in a federal appeals court in California, arguing the settlement should be rejected. Groups like Public Citizens and other supporting organizations like the Center for Digital Democracy say the settlement should have never been approved because using minors' images in ads without parents consent violates the law in several states.
In the settlement, Facebook agreed to pay $20 million to users, and in charitable contributions. That settlement was approved in a federal court last summer, however, an appeals is still pending. Under the settlement, if a user age 13 to 18 is friends with his or her parents on Facebook, then Facebook would provide a control for parents to opt teens out of “sponsored stories.” If a teen indicates that his or her parents are not on Facebook, then Facebook would opt teens out of “sponsored stories.” The Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood (CCFC) was supposed to receive $290,000 under the settlement. It's one of the nonprofit groups as well as universities sharing in about $4.8 million. The sum represented about 90 percent of the CCFC's annual budget last year.
“To put it in perspective, we've never received more than $100,000 from a donor or foundation at any given time in our history,” said Josh Golin, associate director of the nonprofit, known for forcing Walt Disney Co. to offer refunds to people who bought Baby Einstein videos on the company's claims that it boosted babies' intelligence.
Related stories:
Parents and children's advocates are challenging a settlement in a 2011 class-action lawsuit with Facebook, and renewing a battle over teenagers' privacy on the world's largest online social network.
At issue, is how the company uses its cache of information with its 1.23 billion users. According to
“Class-action settlements are supposed to compensate people for wrongdoing and deter the defendant from engaging in the bad behavior in future. This settlement does neither,” said Scott Michelman, the Public Citizen attorney handling the case, in a statement
Last week, the non-profit Public Citizens and six parents of teenagers filed legal brief in a federal appeals court in California, arguing the settlement should be rejected. Groups like Public Citizens and other supporting organizations like the Center for Digital Democracy say the settlement should have never been approved because using minors' images in ads without parents consent violates the law in several states.
In the settlement, Facebook agreed to pay $20 million to users, and in charitable contributions. That settlement was approved in a federal court last summer, however, an appeals is still pending. Under the settlement, if a user age 13 to 18 is friends with his or her parents on Facebook, then Facebook would provide a control for parents to opt teens out of “sponsored stories.” If a teen indicates that his or her parents are not on Facebook, then Facebook would opt teens out of “sponsored stories.” The Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood (CCFC) was supposed to receive $290,000 under the settlement. It's one of the nonprofit groups as well as universities sharing in about $4.8 million. The sum represented about 90 percent of the CCFC's annual budget last year.
“To put it in perspective, we've never received more than $100,000 from a donor or foundation at any given time in our history,” said Josh Golin, associate director of the nonprofit, known for forcing
Related stories:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllOld Laws, New Tricks: Lawyers Using Patchwork of Creative Legal Theories to Target New Tech
Lawsuit Against Amazon Could Reshape E-Commerce Landscape
King Kullen—the Nation's First Supermarket—Hires Outside Counsel as GC
Trending Stories
- 1Trump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
- 2Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 3Climate Disputes, International Arbitration, and State Court Limitations for Global Issues
- 4Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 5Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]
- 6How Much Does the Frequency of Retirement Withdrawals Matter?
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250