Friday night court filings add to Facebook's horrible terrible week. Judge stepped in and ran over FB affirming expectations on negligent discovery: 1) production of Zuckerberg's notebooks 2) discovery of Zuckerberg/Sandberg 3) details on FB's secret whitelisting data deals
/1
4) production of 9 plaintiffs' data in Facebook's possession - ALL OF IT (more on this in a second) 5) more depositions 6) production of Facebook's "secret sauce" memo (all revisions)
now some details...
/2
On the plaintiffs' data ordered for discovery, Facebook's legal team has tries to argue they only have to turn over the data which is accessible or shared. Read what the Judge said about this back to Facebook confirming this is Facebook's position. Which leads naturally to... /3
This entire exchange between the Court and Facebook's legal team (Ms Stein) is something, "it must be that Facebooks collects additional information which is does not want to produce to the named plaintiffs." /4
You can see how Facebook tried to suggest the only data they have to turn over is what is in the "social graph" and "Download Your Information" file. But clearly there is more. With backs against wall, they then argue it's "extraordinarily difficult to find all of it." 👀 /5
If it's too hard ... too difficult ... to pull all of the data Facebook has on a user data protection authorities are all leaning in harder (California/Europe). Even Facebook's own employee isn't signing this section on "sharing data" during deposition... /6
The plaintiff attorneys who are super good and technical jumped all over all of this reminding Court data reciprocity is included in the case and Facebook also "possesses data from data brokers" in addition to inferred data. They want it all, Court rules it's all relevant. /7
"We want a response [from Facebook] admitting that, as well, and an order so that we can tell the jury they took so much data from these nine people they can't even identify it. They don't know where it is, they don't know how it was used." 👀/8
Facebook was also ordered to turn over its communications and audits Zuckerberg promised Congress under oath. Court ordered none of these are privileged since Facebook told the world they would do the investigation to make sure their products were safe. /9
Facebook also filed motion Friday asking to seal the names of two firms that conducted their audits. For some reason, FB really, really doesn't want the world to know who cleaned up the other potential Cambridge Analyticas who have Facebook's user data. /9
These audits are all called the "ADI" (app developer investigation) and it appears there are a whole lot of communications which aren't privileged. AG in Massachusetts also pushed to get these so you've got to expect this is how they will get turned over. /10
These are part of Cambridge Analytica cover-up lawsuits. Facebook successfully wrote a narrative why CA didn't matter but the reality has always been it very much did due to (1) cover-up (securities/governance) and (2) consumer protection (platform was designed to leak). /11
And I'll leave the final words to the Court from their filing last night. Facebook "is far from completing document production. Despite orders from Judge Corley and the Special Master" and the Judge writing this order... /12
"At every turn, Facebook has disparaged Plaintiffs' discovery requests and their efforts to get the information they need. This is a false narrative, belied by the results of Plaintiffs' motions before Judge Corley and the Special Master." /13
This is NdCal (Case No. 18-md-02843-VC-JSC). Gibson Dunn is defending Facebook - not used to being pushed around like this. There was a filing in DC Friday, too, for a parallel case where Court has also lost patience with FB's delay tactics ordering deposition of Zuckerberg. /14
Adding this Order by the Court for this Thursday's NdCal hearing for Facebook's cover-up of Cambridge Analytica related matters threaded above. /15
Incoming... this also just posted. An order from Special Master for case. "MANO" stands for Make America Number One. There's long been questions on extent of Facebook's involvement working alongside Cambridge Analytica employees and campaign. Unlikely much is privileged. /16
Same case, third key filing in like 72 hours. Special Master has ordered the following plaintiff data to be turned over. The question here will be whether Facebook can avoid turning over any user data it has harvested to "tune" its algorithms that's not on the "front end." /17
fwiw, Facebook interrupted hearing then successfully motioned to have the two firms sealed who did their "unprecedented" audits of all potential Cambridge Analyticas. But they came out in a DC lawsuit earlier this week - FTI Consulting and Stroz Friedberg - but shhhhh.... /18
Adding this post as it includes the consultants who worked on the "audits" for Facebook to try to identify where else its data flowed across the universe. Some interesting backgrounds and experience. /19
Bingo. Facebook just filed answer to riddle of which Facebook executive is being sent in response to the Court's order - as the Judge said any other plans should be postponed. It's one of their senior legal execs who has been there more than a decade. /20
Gibson Dunn on behalf of Facebook names the executive but then goes on a six page rant arguing it hasn't delayed and deflected discovery. This paragraph is the most absurd failing to point out facebook covered-up the core issues until 2018 when the lawsuit was then filed. /21
And this order from the Special Master just posted. Everyone/everything in yellow is in a very sensitive position related to the extent of Cambridge Analytics-like abuse of data (and the cover-up). I am telling you...it's getting hot in California. Watch this space. /22
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
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