Facebook news - amended complaint filed to what I previously called "Mother of all lawsuits" - insider trading allegations tied to FB knowingly leaking data for $, paying $5B to cover it up, governance failure, etc. I'll add more context in 15 tweets and link to prior thread. /1
It includes maybe ten new paragraphs - many in insider trading and governance failure sections. Includes new heavily redacted details regarding Facebook's "board" setting up an alleged scapegoat "Special Committee" just in time to settle for $5 billion and protect Zuckerberg. /2
Reminder, the allegation is this was done to avoid Zuckerberg being deposed or having his communications subject to discovery. To end the SEC and FTC lawsuits. There is also new info on the settlement and how many orders of magnitude larger it was than prior settlements. /3
All sorts of board members bailed in that time period. The lawsuit claims it was in part due to "clashes with Zuckerberg." Again, the board, the committees, the special committee, everything pretending to hold Zuckerberg accountable is controlled by Zuckerberg. /4
Many of the allegations relate to people both benefiting and failing in their governance roles. eg it adds a # to Sheryl Sandberg's stock trades during the cover-up in the insider trading allegations allegations. It's a whopping $1.6 billion. /5
There is actually an entire list of defendants in the lawsuit categorized as the "Insider Trading Defendants." Narrator: it's generally good to avoid being labeled this way. /6
Also new is a bunch of detail on one of Zuckerberg's board members who is a partner at WilmerHale. That's insane to me since they represent Facebook in many of its most sensitive lawsuits, coached Zuckerberg when he testified and reportedly do a lotta influencing on Congress. /7
It also adds details on how Peter Thiel has benefited being on the board. When Facebook was opening its platform providing its incredibly valuable data to other companies, some of them were Thiel investments being given special access according to the allegations. /8
On that note. Reminder much of case dates back to Facebook's slowing growth ahead of IPO. They were "running out of humans" as Sam Lessin (yes, that one) noted to Zuckerberg in emails only to regain scale for advertisers by trading on their access to users' personal data. /9
As they opened up platform data, FB whitelisted and gave special access to apps which were categorized as "Mark's friends" and "Sheryl's friends" among others. It's hard to underplay the economic and relationship value of being on those lists. But no, they didn't *sell* data. /10
When Cambridge Analytica happened, leadership and PR flipped out on the word "breach." They likely did this because it didn't fit California's definition of a security breach which would require notification. Instead, the platform was leaking data by design for profits. /11
This is also new. Zuckerberg and Sandberg's admission of direct responsibility. I assume this is intended to set up why it would be wrong to simultaneously be responsible and also drive the decision to pay Billions to settle and protect their own liability from a cover-up. /12
A couple other random notes. Who knew Peter Thiel gets to decide how much Zuckerberg gets compensated? Sleep well my friends. /13
I also didn't know Papamiltiadis left just a couple months ago at the same time he was being named in these lawsuits. I betcha he has an interesting story to tell. /14
OK, that's all for now. Here is a link to my full thread from when this lawsuit was filed by very large pension funds after winning rights to inspect Facebook's books including actual messages between its board and leadership during the cover-up. /15 /eof
Bam. There is it. US Department of Justice has filed - requesting divestiture of Chrome as a remedy for court's finding against Google. Android at risk, too. /1
As it relates to Android, here is how DOJ puts it. Forced divestiture is option that "swiftly, efficiently, and decisively strikes at the locus of some anticompetitive conduct at issue here" but we're ok with tight behavioral remedies with option to divest if they don't work. /2
Revenue sharing for search default and/or preferential treatment - dead. Google's tens of billions to Apple - dead (last I saw it's about 15% of Apple's profits). Reminder, this all needs to be argued and approved by Court and then will get appealed. Still far off. /3
KA-BOOM. So when Google and its proxies (see so-called Chamber of Progress), friendly academics and analysts continue to suggest Chrome has nothing to do with the case, please ask them how many days they were at the trial. 1/3
This is super important. It’s an area @DCNorg (premium publishers) are intensely interested and concerned they get right around ability to restrict. The Court and trial made it clear they understood its importance during trial. We’ll be reading closely on Wednesday. 2/3
Here is the full report from Bloomberg who consistent with the entire trial showed up every day, did the hard work, and now got the massive scoop ahead of Wed filing. 3/3 bloomberg.com/news/articles/…
throwback time at Supreme Court today. Remember when Facebook looked away while data was harvested and sold to Cambridge Analytica (and other firms) ahead of 2016 election then covered it up? Topic finally hit SCOTUS - 10am (Kavanaugh not recusing would be outrageous). 1/3
basically facebook is trying to argue why it didn't need to disclose the "breach" despite never confirming it (2015-2018 which included elections) ahead of scandal going global in 2018. They've since somewhat successfully rewritten history on what happened thru soft press. 2/3
here is a link to oral arguments (supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments…) and a thread into more info. Justice Kavanaugh is best buds with a Facebook exec who was at center of scandal and cover-up. One hour of arguments (US Solicitor General, too). 3/3 x.com/jason_kint/sta…
Just before the clock struck midnight, the Dept of Justice and Google filed their updated Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in the adtech antitrust trial ahead of closing arguments (Nov 25th/EDVA). /1
Google clocked in at 787 pages, DOJ at 422. Much more reading but I found the most enjoyable sections to be DOJ's reminders of Google's evidence abuses along with killing the duty to deal arguments Google has been pumping through its tentacles of paid proxies. /2
"Google chose to train its employees about how to abuse the attorney-client privilege and destroy documents." This was a big freaking deal before the trial started, in all of Google's other antitrust trials and it will be here, too. Don't forget it. /3
Google break-up talks. Big hearing tomorrow fighting over discovery. One question unanswered is... YouTube. Where does it sit? Almost no mention in any of the trials (app store, adtech, search) although arguably one of the most significant "fruits" of G's monopoly abuses. /1
I use the word, "fruit," intentionally as case law says one of the four critical objectives in remedies is denying them and it's fairly unequivocal YouTube is YouTube due to the query+click scale of Google's 90%+ market share in search. YouTube is now #2 discovery surface. /2
Why hasn't YouTube come up more? I would argue it clearly wasn't needed to prove the liability in the trials. And Google's legal defenses have focused on trying to muddy the relevant market. Google worked hard but failed to bring in video (think TV, Netflix, TikTok) in market. /3
There it is. Confirmation directly from the Department of Justice that divestiture of Chrome, Android and/or Play are all on the table as remedies to Google's antitrust abuses. US DOJ's remedies framework just posted. Their final proposal is due Nov 20th. /1
It's a fairly broad, ten pages that starts by reiterating the findings of the DC Court and the duty to seek an order not only addressing the existing harms from Google's illegal conduct but - this is critically important - prevent recurrence going forward. /2
here are the listed findings in a tl;dr format. Note the point of illegal conduct for over ten years and the importance of scale and data. /3