Abstract:
In a case involving the Cambridge Analytica data scandal in New Mexico, the jury ruled that Facebook violated the state's Unfair Trade Practices Act more than 43 million times, finding that the platform had made misleading statements to local consumers about how personal data was processed. The final amount of the fine has not yet been determined, and a judge will be responsible for determining how much civil penalties Facebook should pay for these violations.
The jury found that Facebook made misrepresentations to New Mexico users about how it managed their personal data and engaged in unfair and deceptive practices in its business dealings with third-party companies that allowed advertisers to easily obtain user data. The ruling also found that Facebook profited from misinformation and hate speech while claiming to be removing or combating such harmful content.
The jury also found that Facebook's commitment to an internal investigation after the Cambridge Analytica incident was not fulfilled. The company said at the time that it would investigate how third-party applications handle user data and conduct forensic audits, but it did not implement the alleged measures. Although many years have passed since the Cambridge Analytica scandal and the consulting company has long since gone bankrupt, related privacy issues continue to bring legal consequences to Meta. Meta previously settled the Cambridge Analytica class action lawsuit.
The New Mexico Judicial Department wants to impose the maximum civil penalty allowed by law on Meta, which can be up to $5,000 per violation. Based on more than 43 million violations, the total potential fines could reach billions of dollars. New Mexico Attorney General Raul Torres said that this ruling is a reminder that all companies must abide by the rules, including large technology companies such as Facebook; the case may also affect the actions of other states to hold large technology companies accountable.
A Meta spokesperson responded that the company’s platform is protected by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which involves freedom of speech and users’ rights to their own data. The company believes the jury's verdict is inconsistent with this and will continue to fight what it calls a "misrepresentation of the company's track record."
A few months ago, Facebook also lost another landmark case in New Mexico. The jury found at the time that the social platform was designed to keep young users addicted.
Comments