Judge Warns Facebook in Approving Record $5B Fine for Alleged Privacy Violations
The judge pointed out that some FTC commissioners wanted to specifically sanction Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg for the company sharing private user data with outside parties.
April 24, 2020 at 12:08 PM
5 minute read
A federal judge in Washington, D.C., signed off on a record $5 billion fine imposed by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission on Facebook for allegedly violating federal law and a previous order with its privacy practices.
In an opinion issued Thursday night, U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly of the District of Columbia approved the settlement and sharply criticized Facebook's alleged conduct, which stemmed from the Cambridge Analytica scandal. A whistleblower revealed in 2018 that Cambridge Analytica had harvested data from millions of Facebook users without their knowledge or permission and used the information for political ads.
The scandal and resulting investigation showed that Facebook was sharing user data with third parties, despite users believing that information was being kept private, according to the FTC. The FTC alleged these privacy practices were in violation of both federal law and a 2012 court order Facebook is under for past privacy violations.
Kelly wrote in Thursday's opinion that "the unscrupulous way in which the United States alleges Facebook violated both the law and the administrative order is stunning."
"And these allegations, and the briefs of some amici, call into question the adequacy of laws governing how technology companies that collect and monetize Americans' personal information must treat that information," the judge continued. "But those concerns are largely for Congress; they are not relevant here. Mindful of its proper role, and especially considering the deference to which the executive's enforcement discretion is entitled, the court will grant the consent motion and enter the order as proposed."
The judgement is a record fine from the FTC, which announced the penalty last year. Among the measures formally imposed by Thursday's opinion is a requirement that Facebook clearly tell users when their data can be accessed by outside parties and get their permission if their initial privacy settings don't allow for the information to be shared. The tech giant has also agreed to create a new privacy committee of board members, who cannot be removed without support of two-thirds of shareholders, and Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg will now have more limited control over the company's privacy and security practices.
Facebook is represented in the case by a team at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, including partners Joshua Lipshutz, Orin Snyder and Thomas Hungar.
Some FTC commissioners had pushed for Zuckerberg and other top Facebook executives to be held personally liable for the sharing of private user data, which Kelly acknowledged in his opinion Thursday. However, he said approval of the order is still in the public's interest.
Kelly wrote that while he found the allegations against Facebook "shocking, it is not appropriate for the court to judge the stipulated order as if it were proposed after the United States had already proven those allegations up at trial." He found the order "clears the modest bar of reasonableness."
Kelly noted outside groups had urged him to adopt stronger measures against Facebook.
"But the overall terms of the stipulated order are not unreasonable simply because they do not apply an entirely different privacy-focused legal regime to Facebook or require the company to be broken apart. And the court's role is not to play the executive's part in deciding how to enforce the law," he wrote.
"While the court might well have fashioned different remedies were it doing so out of whole cloth after a trial, none of amici's criticisms call into question the Stipulated Order's reasonableness, or whether it is otherwise appropriate," Kelly added.
And he warned Facebook that if it allegedly violates the terms of the order again, "the court may not apply quite the same deference to the terms of a proposed resolution."
Kelly on Thursday also rejected motions to intervene in the case from the Electronic Privacy Information Center and a pro se plaintiff, Leonid Goldstein, who is suing Facebook separately. He found both lacked standing to be added to the case.
Alan Butler, the interim executive director of EPIC, said in an email Friday that the group "will continue to fight to protect the privacy interests of Facebook users."
"It is certainly important that Facebook be penalized for these violations, and the court noted that $5 billion is the largest fine ever issued by the FTC. But that is not enough," Butler wrote. "Facebook's business practices need to change, and Facebook users need to be protected from such violations in the future. EPIC will work to ensure that the FTC enforces its orders and that Facebook complies with its privacy obligations."
Read more:
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 All9th Circuit Judges Weigh if Section 230 Shields Grindr From Defective Design Claims
2 Federal Judges Rescind Senior Status After Trump Win. Might More Follow?
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Fulton Judge Weighs Whether to Order Fani Willis to Comply With Lawmakers' Subpoenas Over Trump Case
- 2Lawyers Drowning in Cases Are Embracing AI Fastest—and Say It's Yielding Better Outcomes for Clients
- 3Judge Rises to Tifton Superior Court Bench
- 4'It's Like They Lynched You:' Law Professor's Discrimination Claim Reaches High Court
- 5New Teeth for Anti-SLAPP Statute? Absolute Immunity for Union Grievance Proceedings
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