Oh dear, Facebook filed its motion to dismiss for the Delaware shareholder suit I called the "mother of all lawsuits" because it includes charges of insider trading and governance failures related to Cambridge Analytica cover-up. I still think it may bring Facebook down. /1
I find this amusing. In a number of places in its response to the court, Facebook argues there was a failure to allege "red flags." How would the board even know that there were "red flags????" /2
I mean subpoenas from state AGs all over the country, the Federal Trade Commission and international governments wouldn't necessarily indicate anything, right? /3
I mean just the mere fact the FTC was investigating Facebook doesn't mean the board knew Facebook violated its consent order with the FTC, right? /3
speaking of "red flags," by golly that's exactly the term the SEC used when it did its stealth settlement with Facebook the same day they paid off the FTC $5 billion so Zuckerberg wouldn't be exposed to discovery and deposition around the cover-up, the very basis of this suit. /4
about that $5 billion, it's mere pocket change - a "fraction" - compared to what Facebook states the FTC originally wanted despite being many billions more than other prior FTC settlement. So don't worry about the cover-up, respect the deal it received. /5
and certainly don't worry about the insider trading allegations for 80mil shares of stock during the cover-up because that may seem like billions to us mortals, it's a rounding error to a CEO that controls all the stock, board and desperately wanted to avoid deposition. /6
and in the category of normal, misleading statements by Facebook, for the thousandth time, there was no legal certification with Cambridge Analytica. It was a flimsy one-page letter with no legal value 15 months later in 2017 after more press reports surfaced scaring them. /7
and this seems like bad lawyering by Gibson Dunn (who must be making a killing off all of these cases). They make a point the whitelisted apps that had data for another 3+ years had already ceased at the time of NYT's report but earlier noted a few hadn't. Slippery at best. /7
On the probably irrelevant arguments, apparently Mark Zuckerberg has no "emotional depth" in his relationship to his board member and at least one-time friend, Houston. That must hurt some feelings. /8
and I don't think this reads as well as Facebook's law firm intended for it to read. /9
ok, I'll stop there. Here is the thread of the original lawsuit which is much more important to understand than Facebook's motion to dismiss. I'll keep you posted, this is a big one. /10
Confession. Having watched Scott Pelley's outstanding work over nearly three decades, I almost didn't take the time to watch his W.F. commencement speech thinking the news reports told me enough of the facts. Frankly, that would have been a huge mistake on my part. Huge. 1/5
Disclosure: I'm a 60 Minutes fan. In fact, I read Don Hewitt's "Tell Me a Story" after nearly a decade in sports media and it likely tipped the scale in 2007 when I decided to jump to work at CBS. I find Pelley and team brilliant in telling stories in barely 15 min segments. 2/5
“If liberty means anything at all, it means telling someone something that they don’t want to hear. I fear there may be some people in the audience who don’t want to hear what I have to say today but I appreciate your forbearance in this small act of liberty.” - Scott Pelley 3/5
wow, another order for Mark Zuckerberg to sit for another court deposition. This time in a case involving privacy violations with ingesting web-wide health data. Remember they paid billions in cases to try to avoid this. Data and privacy issues are especially sensitive. /1
Zuckerberg depositions are interesting as they often go on for hours with highly informed attorneys driving for answers. And those answers may be put up against the often questioned veracity of his answers to Congress. Yes, as a CEO, he has testified to Congress A LOT. /2
I think his first real depo was SEC on very sensitive data scandal leading to $5B+ settlements with FTC+SEC. That scandal is still playing out in courts (did he overpay to protect himself?) It took 3yrs to get unsealed after I caught it in a footnote. /3
The Verge comes in with a massive scoop on the backstory reporting it was Musk - and Sacks - behind the scenes trying to blow up IP to train AI on behalf of his allies. This wouldn't be a surprise to anyone. /1
they have reports and details on the carnage and firing of the leadership and on the possible incorrect assumption that the new people in charge were running their playbook. /2
It may be rare that @mrddmia is in agreement with Dems but in the world of accountability for big tech abuse whether over data, monetization, IP, censorship, privacy, you name it, these aren't partisan issues. appreciate the shared voice from advocates all around. /3
omg. I can't believe what I am seeing in the FTC v Meta exhibits that just posted. This is the start of a long Oct 2018 thread where redacted executive tells another c-level executive, Adam Mosseri, "some estimates fake engagement [on Instagram] could be in range of 40%." /1
and Mosseri does nothing to dispute the data point either. he actually agrees they are a threat saying, "they present a bigger thread [sic] to the business than to the user experience." The timing of this remarkable if you know the context of what was going on there. /2
Earlier in that year, Facebook was using same Mosseri to pitch and spin (this entire pitch document is amazing behind the scenes) the infamous Wired cover story, WSJ, CNN press on work to improve meaningful social interactions, and much much more. /3 ftcvmeta.app.box.com/s/b8m39toze8uc…
woah, I've now read Google and DOJ's proposed remedies for Google's 3rd antitrust defeat (adtech). I threaded Friday's hearing but this full doc is nothing short of beautiful. Best stuff may be missed so hear me out. This is a huge deal - 10yrs, "lifeblood of the Internet." /1
A reminder on the four objectives of antitrust remedies. In court on Friday and in Google's proposal, Google just seems to ignore the third and fourth as if they don't matter. That's a major problem for them. Judge Brinkema will be all over it. She gets this case wonderfully. /2
For instance, on Friday she labeled Google's ad demand, AdWords, the "golden goose." Now here is how DOJ describes it: "unique advertising demand." Notably, they don't flag that the demand also connects back to Google's other illegal monopoly loss for "search text ads." /3
A few more nuggets of delight for you. First, Tim Apple has had his halo bent. He's arguably had the best reputation of the big tech CEOs until today. He ordered the code red. /1
Alex Roman had a super bad day. If anyone directed him on this testimony cited by the Court, heads will roll. either way, Apple Inc also has big problems. /2