This is such an entertaining read, really, truly I can add nothing. 05-29-2019-Facebook-Inc-Consumer-Privacy Transcript
UPDATE September 12, 2019. In an order dated September 9, 2019 (Facebook order), Judge Chhabria dismissed some, but maintained many, claims of the class action suit. In the opinion, Judge Chhabria addresses Facebooks three main arguments and dismisses two outright, and although he concedes some merit in the third, related to user consent, holds that “they cannot defeat the lawsuit entirely, at least at the pleading stage.” With respect to Facebook’s “main” argument – that their users have no legitimate privacy interest any information they share on social media – the judge did not withhold his contempt:
First, Facebook argues that people have no legitimate privacy interest in any information they make available to their friends on social media. This means, according to Facebook, that if people use social media to communicate sensitive information with a limited number of friends, they have no right to complain of a privacy violation if the social media company turns around and shares that information with a virtually unlimited audience. As explained in Section II of this ruling, Facebook’s argument could not be more wrong. When you share sensitive information with a limited audience (especially when you’ve made clear that you intend your audience to be limited), you retain privacy rights and can sue someone for violating them.
The court provides 71 pages of analysis, including a thorough background with this particularly illustrative excerpt:
In 2013, Aleksandr Kogan created an app called “MyDigitalLife.” Facebook allowed Kogan to market and operate this app on the Facebook platform. The app invited Facebook users to answer a series of questions to help them better understand themselves – a personality test of sorts. But when a user took the test, Kogan was not merely able to collect information about that user; he was able to collect information on the user’s Facebook friends. Emphasis added.