Judge tentatively OKs $725M Facebook settlement: How to apply for a payout
thehill.com
thehill.com
Right now we get some special web site that's like FooCompanyBarIssueSettlement.com, which is descriptive, but how do we know it's not some phishing site?
The site itself always says it's the official site and gives a case number, but there's nothing stopping a fake site from doing those things.
Right now we have to rely on it being reported in the media[1]. That's better than nothing, but why can't the courts (that approve the settlement) have a web site that links to these? Or, as a condition of the settlement, require the company (Facebook in this case) to link to it?
I know lawyers are good at law, not IT security, and I realize this is how it's typically done, but it's still a very poor practice, and it needs to change.
(In this particular case, it's also ironic because the case is about poor practices regarding data security!)
---
[1] And this one has been, including very large news outlets, so I feel pretty confident it's legitimate.
Outside of very limited circumstances (e.g. when everyone is really angry, Hello Equifax!), the average person is remarkably uninterested in filling out data in return for an unknown amount of money, at some nebulously undefined future date, that is likely to be somewhere between $7 and $0.
In these kind of cases, only lawyers make a windfall.
In my opinion, in these type of cases, the amount should be directly correlated to how much revenue the company generated from the sale of the data. If the sale of my data is deemed illegal/unethical/etc, then I should reap all financial benefits plus damages.
What's stopping FB from just continuing this practice and just upping their costs to their customers to include this added "cost" of doing business?
My understanding of the current model is that if {profit} - {legal fees} > {calculated damages settlement}, there's zero incentive not to break the law.
Generally, class actions can include changes in behavior as part of the settlement. Class actions also pave the way for bigger class actions if the behavior isn’t changed, especially since they often negotiated by claiming to have already spent resources fixing the issue and their claims and the settlement have to pass judicial approval.
I’m not saying it’s a perfect system.
Mob justice
But people constantly accept abuse and then forget about it.
While mostly true, I've made four figures over the last five years from these kinds of lawsuit settlements. All of them from cases of companies either violating my privacy rights, or data breaches.
I've made hundreds of dollars from Facebook alone.
> Only U.S. users are eligible for a payment.
So, less than 200 million, for the record. But, that does not change the substance of your point.
I am starting to think this is by design. Congress is full of lawyers and they probably make laws for lawyers. If I were in charge I probably would make laws that benefit engineers.
It's really messed up.
The upside is there is a big incentive for law firms to punish companies that stray from the law, which surely helps keep these companies more compliant than they otherwise would be.
I really feel like these don't. This is what, a fraction of a fraction of their revenue? And it took how many years for it to get to this point? Let me know when governments have stopped being chickenshit and start threatening with substantial revenue amounts, and better yet, jail time for execs.
For instance, Albert Dytch [0] was a party to HUNDREDS of lawsuits, seeking ADA violations for places he essentially went to only with the purpose of finding something wrong to sue for. Why isn't that money distributed across the affected disabled people rather than one guy and his lawyer? The incentives are perverse.
[0] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/21/magazine/americans-with-d...
Subscribe for more content & receive my free ebook to learn how you can start living your best life and make millions off class action lawsuits! /s
Opt-out should be the default state.
We need a better legal system. We need to end the lock hold lawyers have the system. It's entirely too expensive. Allow anyone to practice law. Ban complex judge and lawyer speak.
I guess I shouldn't be surprised?
Or why fines never include at least the profit (let alone income) from illegal activities PLUS a fine?
This is so unfair, I want my $1-$5 damnit!
edit: citation- https://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-biz-facebook-priv...
You don't get to rob a bank and settle for less than you took.
If I don’t live in USA, but used Facebook on US soil, am I eligible?
Sounds like yes?
The form itself says:
> Did you reside in the United States at any time between May 24, 2007 and December 22, 2022, inclusive?
If I stayed a night, that’s “any time”???
But I don't see something called "General Account Settings" after I go to "Account > "Settings and Privacy".
I looked around, and I couldn't find my username anywhere.
"System Currently Unavailable We apologize for the inconvenience, but the system is currently unavailable. Please try again later. Thank you."
Anyone can try filing a similar lawsuit in their local jurisdiction, but there's no guarantee that you'll win if your country's laws are different.
Did this read strange to anyone else? Did Trump really break people’s brains like this?
The whole point of supporting Trump for a lot of these people was simply the delightful thrill of having gained a pet bully that could inflict some form - any form - of grief on people they didn't like, with all the blowback going to the pet and none to themselves.
The same motivation that drives rolling coal on EVs and brandishing assault rifles in public: addiction to petty displays of imagined power over others.