Judge P. Casey Pitts on Monday ruled that the tech industry’s legal shield known as Section 230 didn’t block the lawsuit from mining magnate and philanthropist Andrew Forrest, who discovered his image being used in numerous scam ads on the platform.
Forrest, founder of
The tech company moved the case to the US District Court for the Northern District of California. Forrest is also pursuing a private criminal prosecution against the company in Australia.
Pitts found Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act doesn’t apply to Meta because Forrest’s complaint adequately alleges that the platform’s advanced generative AI advertising tools optimize and contribute to the success of the scam crypto ads. The 1996 federal law provides immunity for internet platforms against lawsuits based on user-created content.
There’s a factual dispute as to “whether Meta’s ad systems were neutral tools that anyone could use” or whether the the tools directly contribute to the illegal content of the ads, Pitts said.
But the judge disagreed with Forrest’s argument that Meta doesn’t get immunity because its alleged conduct happened in Australia. Pitts also dismissed Forrest’s claims of unjust enrichment and negligent failure to warn users about the ads.
Forrest applauded the ruling in a press statement.
“I am prepared to spend whatever it takes to hold Facebook’s Directors and its leaders responsible,” he said. “I don’t care what it costs. I want to see them in the witness stand explaining their actions.”
Meta didn’t immediately return a request for comment.
Bailey Glasser LLP and the Derek G. Howard Law Firm Inc. represent Forrest. Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP represents Meta.
The case is Forrest v. Meta Platforms Inc., N.D. Cal., No. 5:22-cv-03699, 6/17/24.
Credit: Source link
