D.C. Superior Court Rules in Facebook's Favor, Dismisses 2018 CPPA Suit
District of Columbia Superior Court Judge Maurice Ross granted Facebook’s May 17 motion for summary judgment in a Thursday order (docket 2018-CA-008715) dismissing the 2018 lawsuit that alleged Facebook misrepresented privacy protections of users' information. The one-count suit, filed by…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
then-D.C. Attorney General Karl Racine (D), alleged violation of the D.C. Consumer Protection Procedures Act (CPPA). The AG alleged Facebook violated the CPPA by making misleading misrepresentations, omissions and ambiguous statements about how user information could be shared with third-party apps and that it exerted lax oversight in enforcement of third-party apps. The “misleading disclosures” involved friend-sharing, integration partnerships, privacy setting and data-misuse disclosures involving British political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica. In May 2022, Facebook moved the court for summary judgment, saying after “years of discovery,” the District failed to produce any evidence about what misled consumers, and it cited three other cases where the court “considered, and rejected, this very theory challenging Facebook’s disclosure,” Ross said. The court ruled Facebook’s policies “clearly disclosed” all relevant terms in a way that a “reasonable consumer” couldn’t have been misled as a matter of law, Ross said. He cited a section from Facebook’s data use policy (effective 2012-2015) detailing that what users shared could be re-shared “by anyone who can see it.” At the time the suit was filed, Android and iOS hadn't become the primary way users accessed the internet and apps, said Ross, and Facebook had integration partnerships allowing companies such as Apple, Amazon, Blackberry and Yahoo to build Facebook apps for each device. Users had to opt into the integration partnerships by downloading the app and agreeing to terms. He referenced Facebook’s app settings page in privacy settings where users could set parameters for their data down to a customized list of friends. The District didn’t prove Facebook’s enforcement and monitoring efforts were insufficient, Ross said, saying Facebook never guaranteed how it would proceed in an enforcement probe. The social media platform’s data use policy and rights statement “clearly set out Facebook policies and were available for users to read,” it said. A spokesperson for the D.C. AG office said Friday: “We respectfully disagree with the Court’s decision and are considering all of our options.”