Jason Kint Profile picture
Sep 21, 2021 38 tweets 15 min read Read on X
!!! news. mother of all lawsuits quietly filed last month vs Facebook in Delaware. I'll explain why it avoided notice until now in a bit but Zuckerberg, Sandberg, CFO, board inc Peter Thiel and Palantir are defendants - it's a result of sealed docs between FB execs and board. /1 Image
Major new plaintiff allegations - many long concerning:
1 FB spent billions to protect Zuckerberg personally
2 claims "epic corporate governance breakdown"
3 adds list of "insider trading" defendants
4 documents Zuckerberg misled Congress /2 Image
It's a whopping 390 pages and there is a related 220 page suit filed in same court on the same day. Together they bring the kitchen sink on allegations as to how the platform gained market power, failed its 2012 FTC Consent Decree, covered-up and failed to disclose data harms. /3 ImageImage
As background, State of Rhode Island originally had sued Facebook claiming it WAY overpaid FTC by as much as $4.9B to protect Zuckerberg. It won rights to inspect a lot of docs from 2013-2019 leading to this new lawsuit which draws on a ton of evidence from all over the place. /4 ImageImage
The central allegation kicking this off is the FTC's draft settlement named Zuckerberg personally which would have caused all sorts of issues for him. The board, entirely controlled by Zuckerberg, refused and paid $5B to protect him so FTC didn't name him personally. /5 Image
The allegations in this new derivative lawsuit upon seeing the board docs is that all of this is a result of the lawsuit calls an "epic governance failure," more on that in a minute. /6 Image
Original suit of course was filed due to Cambridge Analytica. New lawsuit has more details than anything I've seen (many sealed). Reminder, case centers on millions of stolen and sold Facebook users' data. According to suit, only .31% had consented to it being shared. /7 Image
As Zuckerberg's close buddy, Bosworth, helped broadcast at the time - Facebook claimed it wasn't a "breach" or "hack" because the systems were designed and known to work the way they did. The platform was the hack. But of course, a reminder, Facebook doesn't sell your data. /8 Image
As we learned in earlier discovery from Attorney General of DC combined with pressure and hearings from the UK, employees knew about Cambridge Analytica. They called it "sketchy" even before Guardian brought their attention to it. /9 Image
Here is another reference to knowledge which was confirmed by the UK data commissioner, too. AOC famously asked about the knowledge and awareness in a hearing in late 2019 causing Zuckerberg appeared to stumble on his answer to keep his story straight. /10 Image
And it was politically sensitive. A Fall 2020 Channel 4 News documentary even reported and uncovered more details on how the data was used for voter suppression and microtargeting in key battleground states. But that's for a different thread. /11 Image
This lawsuit even includes the fact Facebook hired one of the co-founders of the company that mined and sold the Facebook data to Cambridge Analytica at a sensitive time. His entire tenure and existence is still a deep mystery in all of this but good to see in the lawsuit. /12 Image
and again, this lawsuit isn't about politics but instead antitrust, governance and SEC-related failures. A reminder to the antitrust matters: one core allegation is Facebook accelerated its shift to mobile leveraging data reciprocity deals. It's very much in here, too. /13 Image
We know this from previously unsealed emails and messages which showed the constructs of cutting off data feeds to apps that were seen as competitive threats or weren't willing to provide revenues for Facebook. Again, ladies and gentlemen, they didn't sell your data. /14 Image
A hat tip at this point to UK Parliament, specifically MP Damian Collins, who really led the world in uncovering as much of the details here either through accountability pressure and leaked docs as they tried to get Facebook leadership to answer questions at hearings. /15 Image
There is a lot in the lawsuit around Facebook's failure to honor its 2012 Consent Decree. This includes sealed sections that at least appear to suggest the board and leadership never even reviewed required PWC audits or connected any dots to Cambridge Analytica. /16 Image
Speaking of PWC, this is new to me. It appears they did an investigation in 2019 after everything hit the fan for Facebook but their engagement was ended before the report was finalized. (note, 220 docs are board materials turned over as part of original suit). /17 Image
Of course, Zuckerberg's control of the board is not new and is drawn on the separate class of stock (negotiated with assistance by current board member, Marc Andreessen), he controls voting power. He even controls the Nominating Committee to the board among allies. /18 Image
The lawsuit allegations claim this results in a board where directors are ousted regularly and are mostly in some way conflicted in their relationships to the leadership or the company. These is a lot of pages on this issue. /19 Image
Lawsuit also claims, "Congress Calls Defendant Zuckerberg To Question And Is Met With Dishonesty" regarding false or misleading answers to Congress. I've documented these concerns in threads previously but good to see claims going before a court. /20 Image
in testimony, Zuckerberg regularly claimed users maintain control over their data - there are several pages of examples in the lawsuit. However, NYT reported Facebook was actually whitelisting companies to still receive user data through and after his testimony. /21 ImageImage
Zuckerberg and Facebook also made a big deal how they reacted quickly in Dec 11, 2015 when they found out - supposedly from press reports - what Cambridge Analytica was doing including implying they scrambled to get legal certification the data was deleted. Not so much. /22 ImageImage
Another allegation in the lawsuit of misleading testimony is Zuckerberg suggesting Facebook doesn't collect data from other apps. It doesn't mince words.
"The Zuckerberg testimony quoted in the immediately preceding paragraph is materially false and misleading." /23 Image
Lawsuit expands further with research that "61% of apps...automatically transfer data to Facebook" upon launch. Yes, that's why Facebook is freaking out about Apple's new privacy rules which kneecap Facebook's surveillance ads business (which continues to thrive on Android). /24 Image
The "Insider Trading" allegations relate and document the hundreds of millions to billions made by insiders who would have been aware or neglected their governance duties as documents and risks were filed with SEC making *actual* harms realized read like *hypothetical* risk. /25 Image
And of course, the lawsuit even catches up to reports in 2021 noting the lack of change in Facebook attitude as they treated news in April 2021 of 530 million records being exposed as an issue only if the press volume didn't continue to decline. PR also confused press on it. /26 ImageImage
Final point, the lawsuit asks for this in relief but I would also note there is a lot of sealed board docs. The Attorney General of DC is also deep into discovery and depositions (hearing next Tue 9/28 @ 2:30pm) in much-related case.
Someone needs to wake up the SEC, though. /27 Image
As to how this suit wasn't noticed, Delaware Chancery charges a fortune per document limiting public awareness. Original case to inspect board docs (Rhode Island) was won, derivative suits were amended/filed/consolidated in shell game. I followed the breadcrumbs. Voila. /eof /28 ImageImage
I see this is taking off so a reminder to everyone this is the plaintiffs' claims. But it does bring together an enormous amount -and- they decided to file after inspecting board docs. Everything was from the 2nd complaint, there is also the Rhode Island suit filed same day.
For the @AOC fans, the R.I. lawsuit also includes Zuckerberg's bumbling answers when surprised during a crypto hearing which certainly appeared as if he was trying to keep his story straight. Image
Here is Bloomberg Law on the original lawsuit victory to inspect the documents. If you want my highlighted versions, shoot me an email or DM. If someone posts the lawsuits, I'll add a link here. news.bloomberglaw.com/tech-and-telec…
Here is a thread for those interested in going down the rabbit hole on video of unanswered questions and misleading answers from the various hearings.
Also, strongly encourage anyone with the complaint to read it thoroughly, there are a lot of allegations in it particularly how conflicts of interest and the board governance. I just had to end my thread.
And yes, newsrooms and press should work to get these unsealed. The largest settlement, by far, in history in which the leadership was able to squeeze into the board committee meetings and influence the outcome deserve more sunlight. ImageImageImageImage
👀 Chair of the Special Committee that would review the $5 billion settlement emailing Sandberg as everything hit the fan.

Sheryl,

-Ken Image
hat tip to @FBoversight as they have posted the complaints here.
Will add any press reports I see regarding the above thread ⬆️. Politico just moved a report. politico.com/news/2021/09/2…
Several other good reports on this thread but Gizmodo just filed one of the clearest. Highly recommend. gizmodo.com/facebook-paid-…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Jason Kint

Jason Kint Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @jason_kint

Apr 11
!!!!! just unsealed, and higher than prior news reports. /1 Image
we learned last Fall in a different G lawsuit (NdCal) during widely reported testimony the number 36% as the share Google paid Apple to be locked in as default search across Apple's surfaces.
But now this was just unsealed from the two key contracts (here is 2014 which even then was 37.5%) /2Image
Here are the various Google and Apple contracts where those screen caps originate. /3 storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
Read 4 tweets
Mar 26
Whoa. Facebook had a secret "Project Ghostbusters" (get it?) which allegedly was to decrypt "man-in-the-middle" style Snapchat traffic to copy it. Yellow highlight indicates redactions just lifted in nine unsealed plaintiffs briefs in private antitrust lawsuit. Wild stuff. /1 Image
A lot of new stuff. There was lots of reporting (including Apple threats to boot Facebook) at the time on Facebook's software and Onavo acquisition allowing it to "spy" on competitive apps but I recall the decryption was written as a hypothetical. CEO email kickstarting it. /2 Image
You can read the press back in Jan 2019 spoon fed by Facebook PR to friendlies with no mentions of decrypting SSL then compare to this internal email below sent to Facebook's most senior executives - "currently includes SSL decryption"... /3 Image
Read 16 tweets
Mar 14
TikTok? Y’all are crazy. Yes, it’s a huge problem but hypocrisy. Last year after Facebook worked years to keep it sealed, a court unsealed its secret app audit. It showed 86,961 developers in China had access to all of our personal data…yet crickets. /1 storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
This is the same app audit Zuckerberg promised Congress after concerns American’s personal data had been readily mined in Russia. Throw in Iran, North Korea, you name it. Press didn’t dig in. A good source told me DOJ and Congress hadn’t ever even seen this forensic audit. /2
Yet Facebook had spent four years trying very hard to keep even the names of the forensic auditing / clean-up firms confidential. Senate Intel Chairs did send a letter, no word on whether Facebook even responded to them. /3
Read 4 tweets
Mar 14
ok, I've now read the NYT response this week to attempts by OpenAI to dismiss NYT's landmark lawsuit against the high-flying AI company.
Put simply, NYT makes it brutally clear on page one how you can tell the difference between the two companies.
Oomph. /1 Image
A few other observations from me. Like NYT's original complaint, it's smart and future-focused on fair value. Where OpenAI made frankly bizarre claims NYT was hacking the platform as it detected OpenAI had its content, NYT is right. OpenAI isn't and can't dispute it copied it. /2 Image
Um, 2022 > 2020 = TRUE. Where OpenAI tried to inject a statute-of-limitations argument that OpenAI's lifting of content was "common knowledge" in 2020, NYT points out that ChatGPT and OpenAI didn't go viral until Nov 2022. /3 Image
Read 11 tweets
Mar 6
That's rich.
Microsoft's motion to dismiss NYT landmark lawsuit against MSFT/OpenAI. The most valuable company on the planet at 3 trillion claims the right to mine (aka 'harness') every work of journalism as part of its 'collaboration.' Comparing it to copying video tapes. 1/6 Image
To be fair, MSFT, and its leadership, were testifying from Australia to US Congress on importance of a free and plural press and antitrust enforcement to support it just a few yrs ago. They genuinely seemed to care now Team Nadella has prioritized its OpenAI 'collaboration.' 2/6
I keep putting 'collaboration' in air quotes as it's an amusing attempt to reframe what is an investment worth tens of billions in which MSFT's CEO literally helped save the OpenAI CEO and company late last year. 'Collaboration' is a nice lawyer spin word for it. 3/6
Read 6 tweets
Mar 1
If you’re looking for positive courtroom news, Meta’s “nuclear” structural constitutional lawsuit v FTC in response to the FTC’s show cause to ban it from surveillance capitalism with minors went very very poorly just now. /1
Meta attempted to argue bias based on a few words in the show cause, not the statute itself, which the court called the “weakest argument” that there would be irreparable injury. A lot of back and forth but no ground given. /2
I bore you with this as the court also pointed out the high bar for irreparable injury in DC court and most small businesses can’t reach it yet risk can mean they go out of business. He said I’m fairly certain ”a few months of litigation won’t put Meta out of business.” /3
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(