Meta Platforms reached a settlement to resolve claims brought by states across the country that the company designed Instagram and Facebook to addict children, misled consumers about their safety, and improperly collected personal data of children who used its platforms, court papers show.
The deal was reached during a California federal court trial over claims brought by 29 states, averting one of the highest-profile tests yet of allegations that social media companies harmed young users.
Just days before jury selection began on August 12, a federal appeals court declined to halt the trial.
The claims are part of a broader wave of litigation brought by states, local governments, school districts and individuals alleging Meta and other social media companies fueled a nationwide youth mental health crisis.
The federal trial covered claims from the attorneys general of California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey that Meta violated their state laws protecting consumers.
The trial also covered claims from 29 states that Meta violated the federal Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act by collecting personal data from users it knew were children without parental notification or consent, and using the data to train machine learning and generative AI models.
Meta has denied the allegations, saying it has worked hard to protect children on its platforms. The company had argued it could not have misled consumers about whether its services were addictive because “social media addiction” is not a recognized psychiatric condition.
In a filing before the trial, Meta said California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey were seeking up to $1.4 trillion in penalties. The states had not revealed a specific dollar amount but said at a hearing before the trial started that the figure would be closer to $200 billion. The states were also seeking additional monetary damages, plus an order directing Meta to make major changes to its platforms and to bar children from creating accounts.
A MENTAL HEALTH CRISIS
Meta, Snapchat and its parent Snap Inc, YouTube and its parent Alphabet, and TikTok and its parent ByteDance still face thousands of lawsuits in federal and state courts over claims they knowingly designed their platforms to have features that are addictive to children and teens, fueling a mental health crisis.
The federal cases were consolidated before U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland, and include lawsuits brought by individuals, school districts and state governments.
Thousands more cases against the companies are pending in state courts. A judge in Los Angeles is overseeing thousands of lawsuits brought by individuals who say they or their loved ones were harmed by the platforms’ designs.
Around 30 states have filed lawsuits against the companies in state courts, court records show. A trial has been ongoing in Nashville since July over claims brought by the state against Meta.
The settlement comes after Meta lost both phases of a landmark lawsuit brought by New Mexico. A jury in March ordered it to pay $375 million after finding it had misled consumers about the safety of its platforms. On August 6, a judge found Meta had created a public nuisance and ordered it to pay an additional $567 million and implement youth-safety measures.
Also in March, the first trial over an individual’s claims against Meta and Google ended with a verdict in the plaintiff’s favor. A Los Angeles jury found the companies liable for plaintiff Kaley G.M.’s depression and anxiety and ordered them to pay a combined $6 million in damages.
The companies have said they will appeal those verdicts.
All four companies settled the first case set for trial in federal court, where a Kentucky school district alleged they were liable for harm to students. Breathitt County School District was set to receive a combined $27 million, public records showed.
DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.
DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.
