Woah. Court just ruled to certify the class in lawsuit alleging Facebook sold ads based on inflated potential reach and then fraudulently covered it up. I'll link to more background on the case (and damning discovery) but first we have a few words from the federal judge. /1
Court does a nice job in a few sentences explaining Facebook told advertisers its "potential reach" in the US was 200 million people - note the word "people" is important - before they would narrow to a more targeted group leveraging Facebook's surveillance engine. /2
Facebook's (no, I won't call them Meta) lawyers first tried to suggest the class fails because it includes both small and large advertisers which went over like a lead balloon with this federal judge, errr "the objection is not well taken." /3
Court rules that the class is typical as all advertisers saw the same "potential reach estimates inflated by a similar percentage." /4
Court also ruled the class was adequate and the record hadn't found they didn't suffer a concrete injury among other reasons. Again, fail by Facebook. /5
In fact, the plaintiffs had claimed they would not have spent certain budget $ on Facebook if they knew the Potential reach was inaccurate. So this is a big deal. /6
Court even uses the "word" deceived to describe the effect on the plaintiffs. Keep that word in mind as we continue along this journey to use a word loved by Sheryl Sandberg. /7
In the key question of whether Facebook's inflated potential reach mislead advertisers, the Court rules Facebook doesn't disagree but "hurls a grab bag of challenges to plaintiffs' ability of proving an answer in their favor." Ouch. /8
Back to the word, "people," Court also notes Facebook doesn't dispute it originally described the inflated potential reach as "people" despite it representing "accounts" many of which were duplicate, fake, etc etc etc. /9
Here we get to the Court pointing to docs showing Facebook's knowledge (the fraud allegation) and that this metric was "the most important number in its ads creation interface" impacting budget plans and strategies. /10
And this line from Court speaks to Facebook's market power and antitrust cases also in various courts along with the necessity of class as no reasonable person (read as advertiser in this case) is likely to be able to pursue this lawsuit on their own against Facebook. /11
Bringing us to the order from the Court to certify the class in both the common law fraud claims against Facebook and injunctive relied under the unfair competition law. This case will include millions of advertisers on Facebook. /12
ok, here is archived thread on this lawsuit. You should also know FB whistleblower filed related SEC complaint. FB's very top execs appeared to decide not to share at earnings (since it wouldn't hurt $ and ads biz unless advertisers knew! - yikes). /eof
ok, this is HUGE. Late Friday, Penske (PMC) filed a wicked-smart, landmark antitrust lawsuit against Google. I've now read it in full and I'm very impressed. Importantly, it's the first antitrust suit for Google tying its AI-driven products to its adjudicated search monopoly. /1
The core claim: Google is abusing its search monopoly to force pubs to hand over content - not just for traditional search indexing but to feed its AI. Google then repurposes it to substitute them with its own services breaking the fundamental bargain of the open web. /2
Penske says this is not a fair exchange. If it weren't for Google's adjudicated monopoly power (recall Judge Mehta said they get 19x as many queries as next biggest), Google would be paying pubs for these rights or if it didn't then they would opt-out of providing them. /3
OK all ye people depressed Judge Mehta didn't order Google broken into bits this week. I'm here to cheer you up. DOJ has its other remedies trial in 16 days and just posted its PFJ (Proposed Final Remedies) now 60+ pages of brilliant detail. Let me walk you through key terms. /1
This is the 2023 US v Google adtech win - the one DCN and its premium publishers have long been much more deep and focused on. Here’s what it means for publishers of all types - and why it will be a massive win for the open web if Judge Brinkema signs on (I believe she will). /2
First, clear structural remedies. Google must divest AdX, its ad exchange, w/in 2yrs and likely DFP, its publisher ad server. No more vertical ad stack monopoly with interest conflicts. This would finally decouple tools Google can use to rig auctions and suppress pub revenues. /3
All eyes at Google on streaming NFL game tonight but Google Inc and its many monopolies have had quite the week. I’ve been absorbing on this end, some quick Friday thoughts on things missed. Bad news certainly for the public, and also DCN members, in US v Google Search case. /1
Judge Mehta said "no thanks" to helping publishers - because he said no pubs testified. Maybe that’s what retaliation fear looks like??? He also noted the unlawful conduct was about distribution deals, not deals with publishers. More on that in a minute. /2
Despite Mehta finding Google illegally maintained its 95%+ search monopoly with browser deals, he also said it’s OK for Google to keep owning Chrome - the world’s biggest browser - so they can keep paying everyone else and free riding on their own browser. All bad here. /3
Woah. Facebook just settled immediately before board members Andreessen, Thiel, Zuckerberg, Desmond-Hellman, and Sheryl Sandberg were set to testify as to who knew what and when…depriving public of any accountability and facts in courtroom from board and officer comms. 1/3
Counter to Facebook lawyers framing yesterday, the DC AG suit isn’t dead (awaiting DC Circuit from 1/30 hearing), and NdCal shareholder suit also still alive. This is the closest to
Courtroom testimony after about $8B+ in settlements. 2/3
Credit to Reuters, Delaware Online who I saw actually showed up to cover. It’s likely why Facebook, Zuckerberg and its board, let this one get so close. But the grid. But today things were likely to get very very hot. 3/3
News cycles. News cycles. What I called the "mother of all lawsuits" for Facebook in 2021 goes to trial TOMORROW. Zuckerberg, Marc Andreessen, Sheryl Sandberg, Peter Thiel, other board members expected to testify live as to who knew what and when in its largest scandal ever. /1
Meanwhile, Zuckerberg and Facebook comms have successfully flooded the zone with AI-hype and exclusive CEO interviews mostly distracting the press away from a trial on how they leveraged, and allegedly abused, personal data to drive a decade of massive growth in mobile share. /2
The case involves allegations the board broke its loyalty to company (and Zuckerberg insider traded on stock) after Facebook had been long violating its FTC consent decree and other privacy laws - all covered up by nearly $8 billion in settlements ($5B alone with the FTC). /3
Woah. Exhibit list just posted for Facebook trial in DE starting in a few weeks. We finally have confirmation Sheryl Sandberg was deposed by the SEC - one week prior to Zuckerberg which also kept secret until a lawsuit unsealed it. Sandberg was also sanctioned in this case. /1
This matters as it gets at Who Knew What When at FB ahead of the world finding out its platform was leaking personal data for years. Zuckerberg was dodgy at best under oath to Congress, FB responses to Parliaments focused on 2018 news. But exhibits include Jan 2017 MZ emails. /2
The DE lawsuit claims Facebook's $5 billion record settlement was inflated in order to protect its CEO, Zuckerberg, and also includes (civil) insider trading claims. Zuckerberg was ordered to sit for multiple day depo this year, will have to testify live. /3