Slashdot Mirror
Facebook Privacy Suit Seeks $15 Billion
An anonymous reader writes "The folks at Facebook may be focusing on their IPO today, but a complaint filed in federal court has given them something else to think about. The filing consolidates 21 separate but similar cases and alleges Facebook invaded users privacy by tracking their browsing behavior even after they had logged out of the site. The claim seeks $15 billion in damages. 'If the claimants are successful in their case against Facebook, they could prevent Menlo Park from collecting the huge amount of data it collects about its users to serve ads back to them. Like the previous lawsuits, Facebook is once again being accused of violating the Federal Wiretap Act, which provides statutory damages per user of $100 per day per violation, up to a maximum per user of $10,000. The complaint also asserts claims under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, the Stored Communications Act, various California Statutes and California common law.'"
denounced citizenship just in time...
Now I won't get my $15 coupon off a Facebook branded hoodie as part of a settlement.
I guess I should have created a Facebook account.
Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
If you want privacy, don't sign up to Facebook.
So if the law they are suing under allows a maximum of $10,000 per claimant then how did they ever arrive at $15 billion split between just 21 people?
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
Wouldn't any company that using tracking cookies be guilty under this definition of wiretapping?
Now that the value is known, there will be a lot of people suing facebook. It will keep their lawyers busy.
Website Just Down For Me? Find out
so if they are charged with violation of federal wiretap laws, with a max for 10k per person, thats still only 210k where does the other 14 999 790 000 come into it, cant say 500m each in damages for facebook tracking their web activities wtf really, just sounds like an attempt at easy money, probably will drop the case once facebook tries to settle.
This IPO was today. If this was released and "mediatized" yesterday it would have hurt the IPO quite a bit. Now of course, the share holders are stuck with it. Maybe since it helps keep the value of the lawsuit up it helps the case along to boot.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Damages: $15,000,000,000.00
User compensation: $2,100.00
Lawyer fees: $14,999,997,900.00
"'If the claimants are successful in their case against Facebook, they could prevent Menlo Park from collecting the huge amount of data it collects about its users to serve ads back to them."
And people in hell want ice water.
Fleshlight Hulk Hands!
If you want privacy, don't sign up to Facebook.
Funny how when Company XYZ does something that offends the privacy concerns of just about everyone, some slashdot user who likes Company XYZ shrugs and dismisses the ethical, moral, and possibly legal infractions under the non-argument "caveat emptor".
Hell, more often than not hackers theft of private computer data (err, sorry "duplication") and re-posting of it to public (sorry, "whistleblowing") is celebrated: You can steal from Company XYZ, but you can't steal from User 1990235630 ? Government ABC shouldn't track my data, but User 12363247 and Company XYZ(2) can ?
Sorry, but "don't use it" just isn't good enough. Anymore than government ABC shouldn't access my data, neither should these companies be doing what I understand them NOT to be allowed to do. The terms of service is two ways, mind you. It's not a contract just for my behavior. It's a contract for theirs. It establishes a mutual understanding of what we can and (most often) cannot do to each other and each other's stuff. These companies don't hold up their end of the bargain as expressed to us during the initial agreement, so "don't use it" doesn't place culpability of my privacy violations squarely on my shoulders.
I wish the majority ethical consensus on Slashdot would get just a little more consistent across these types of stories.
Greed.
21 people suing because they were tracked DEFINITELY deserve 15 billion. I could totally see how they would have 715million in damaged each from facebook's egregious actions.
On a serious note, the government sets the value of a life at $6-9 million. So facebook could have just kill these people, and save $14.874 billion.
I don't sign up for it. I don't have a facebook account.
Yet when I accidentally visit their main site (facebook.com), I get (without logging in) a tracking cookie on my PC. Even though I have ALL cookies turned off in chrome.
Explain to me where I signed off my privacy rights. Is visiting a site the same thing as signing an TOS these days?
What's funny is I don't think the stock will fall because of this. :o
"Even if you don't sign up to Facebook, they are tracking you because of their little F icon and/or scripts/cookies are being loaded up by your web browser on any webpage you are visiting."
I assume you've never heard of Tor, and of browsing websites with cookies/javascript disabled.. noscript/torbutton/https everywhere installed, all "plugins" disabled, and through a secure web proxy like Startpage. Go ahead, exit nodes, sniff my encrypted traffic! Facebook/Twitter and other sites tracking you mean nothing when you're just an exit node through Tor, up one day and down the next and replaced by another.
well first off, that is if they are found guilty. i can sue anyone for anything and we are suppose to be innocent until proven guilty. that being said; I hope they get roasted (if they are guilty). not the $25,000 (?) fine Google got either. if these companies don't get bitch slapped then they will keep doing wrong. i am just kind of mad that more users don't stand up for their rights.I am not a FB person and do not have an account anymore. not to stray off topic to much but it seems like it got to the point where you were obligated to "friend" people even they you may not really want to. on the bright side if they do lose they already know where to mail the checks. They have all their information already :)
Ask: Why did the early investors/founders in FB increase the number of shares they floated in the last few days (to 15% of the company, iirc), and radically overprice the IPO instead of pricing for investor excitement/momentum/growth?
That's right. They know that the end game is right now. This is just one reason.
On a related tangent...anyone heard anything about the latest with Paul Ceglia?
Ceglia was briefly represented by a huge global law firm (DLA Piper), claiming a contract with Zuck showed that he owned half the shares of FB. DLA Piper mysteriously dropped off the case. But other lawyers have been happy to pick it up, and then mysteriously drop off the case. Hmmm. What's the definition of "strongarm"? ;)
The lawyers will take 33% ($5 billion), so you'd only get a $10 coupon.
What about those guys he stole Facebook from? Are they being sued as well?
I'm torn here.
I think Facebook could stand a good whack in their sails over Privacy, and have a judge make it stick.
Meanwhile Oracle's lawsuit is pure platypus shit (more expensive than horse shit, and more exotic) precisely because the legal system currently has no proportional-metric penalty on the size of suits. "Let's sue for 15 billion! Let's make Defense counterprove each and every one of 87 points down, and we only spend $3,000,000 on legal fees."
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
...the legal system currently has no proportional-metric penalty on the size of suits. "Let's sue for 15 billion! Let's make Defense counterprove each and every one of 87 points down, and we only spend $3,000,000 on legal fees."
A lawsuit does not have a "size" in terms of damages, until damages are actually awarded. Until then, the size of the suit is determined by its costs.
If you are sued, spend $100K defending the suit, the judge dismisses the suit as frivolous, and the judge awards you 2x your defense costs ($200K)...that seems more than fair.
If you don't agree, you can sue for whatever other damages (loss of business, etc) you may have incurred as a result of the lawsuit.
It has absolutely nothing to do with the amount of damages claimed by the plaintiff.
Yes, in the end the plaintiff's may get squat and the layers make a fortune.
However, sometimes the message sent is worth more than the dollars earned.
I doubt that anyone is going to see $15 billion, even the lawyers. However if they manage to hit FB for enough money to make it hurt, then that's going to spark a change in behaviour. The end result is still beneficial to those that don't want to be tracked.
Unlike lawsuits where people are out some monetary amount due to a defective product or physically harmful practice, the message *IS* the answer in this case.
All facebook domain I know of are redirected to 127.0.0.1. Sometimes that means I domn't understand immediately why some stuff don't work, but it is an easy price to pay to not be tracked.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
$10,000 per user max award.
lets see just how many of those claimed 900+ million users are in fact real, legitimate, and unique persons... 10 grand ought to be enough to entice most of them to file a claim with the courts.
The stock was obviously only kept up by the bankers because they didn't want egg on their face for a first day stock drop. One has to wonder how much stomach they will have for propping the stock up before it sinks to a more sane value. The smart money should be pulling out because they know this.
So... people who don't want others to know they get rectal exams post-age-50-whatever shouldn't have them? That's what the logic says. Not wanting others to know != said thing being wrong, you idiot.
If you believe in privacy, and believe you have "nothing to hide" at the same time, you're a goddammed idiot