Jason Kint Profile picture
Apr 6, 2022 20 tweets 8 min read Read on X
wow, what a Facebook read. On request of federal Judge, plaintiffs filed sanctions in super important case vs FB. Originally sealed 55pgs + 1,500 in exhibits, it showed up this wknd when FB filed redactions.
Let me show you the highlights - I'll try to keep to a dozen tweets. /1 ImageImage
It kicks off with a quote from the Partner for the law firm, Gibson Dunn, that has led the alleged discovery abuse to protect Facebook in its Cambridge Analytica cover-up. Same firm protecting FB in DC for a similar case and even in the Rhohingya genocide case. Nice choices. /2 Image
Unlike in DC where Gibson Dunn appeared to run a bulldozer over new judge with its narrative, NdCal Court isn't having any of it and requested plaintiffs file sanctions including remarkably against the partners at Gibson Dunn - a BFD. Plaintiffs kindly focused on Orin Snyder. /3 Image
Although plaintiffs point out, they're only filing a few examples of the discovery abuse, they pick some telling ones. It includes the math that they're 8 for 9 on discovery motions with one pending. They also go deep on a few of the most sensitive and furthest along examples. /4 Image
One is the App Developer Investigation ("ADI"). This is the audit Zuckerberg promised Congress FB would do to protect all of us. Gibson Dunn handled it and then resisted discovery even trying to keep two firms sealed that did the work (FTI Consulting and Stroz Friedberg). /5 Image
It's just a good example because Facebook's lawyers argued it would delay the case a year but then Orin Snyder at Gibson Dunn said no problem they would turn the docs over in 21 days once the Court had started to scorch them for discovery abuse. /6 Image
Another example is Facebook has been ordered to turn over all of the data on the 8 named plaintiffs including inference data from tracking people everywhere they go. Again, FB has argued it would be incredibly burdensome which flies in the case of California and EU law. /7 Image
Instead Facebook has tried to draw a line around a person's user data available when you click their "Download Your Information (DYI)" link. This is only a subset of activity understood to record maybe a site but not what you did on it for example. /8 Image
Facebook has tried to draw the line so they only have to turn over what data is actually "shared" with third parties. And of course, Facebook gets to define what "shared" even means. California AG's eyes should be bugging out here. Court again wants none of this BS argument. /9 Image
Here is where the Court lets Snyder and Gibson Dunn know (not for the first time) what her order meant. It was affirmed by the Special Master and the lead Judge on the case. Another reason for sanctions invitation. Is Facebook's surveillance even worse than we've known? /10 Image
ok, I've got two left. During the peak discovery abuse, Facebook had to bring an employee in to be deposed on behalf of the company on the topics they were resisting - this fella, Mr Pope. Sort of feel bad for him. According to plaintiffs, he admitted... well you read it. /11 Image
And as someone who has watched many hearings with Gibson Dunn FB team in NdCal and DC, again where these tactics seem to have unfortunately worked. Can you imagine representing an awful-except-for-the-$$$ client like Facebook, facing sanctions and telling plaintiffs this? /12 Image
Aaah heck, baker's dozen, here is a 13th tweet as it hits narrative by Gibson Dunn to protect Facebook in its cover-up. DC Superior Court was moving along in same direction but new 2022 Judge has pretty much gone all-in on the narrative even killing deposition of Zuckerberg. /13 Image
Here is a thread I did at the time of the hearing when the Court invited the sanctions. They've since even suggested maybe there should be terminating sanctions as the discovery abuse has been so bad. Facebook has a right to oppose so we'll see... /14
I really don't know what happened in DC. Facebook resisted forever finally turning over its privilege log in February with like 4,000 employees on it and clearly a ton of discovery that shouldn't be privileged. /15
Plaintiffs had also won ruling to have a deposition of Mark Zuckerberg. This is the same matter, Facebook is alleged to have paid off the FTC $5 billion to protect MZ against a deposition and he's dodged questions of Congress and Parliaments. BFD. /16
But then a few weeks ago, Gibson Dunn ran the same play they attempted in NdCal with a narrative that plaintiffs have been fishing too long, they've been cooperative and its time to shut down discovery. Which worked in DC. /17
OK, I'll send there but I wanted to make sure everyone had the full context. There is also a related massive shareholder suit in Delaware. @AlisonFrankel covered the sanctions request for Orin Snyder, Gibson Dunn and Facebook today. ht @MikeScarcella /eof reuters.com/legal/litigati…
Facebook's law firm filed its response last night to the sanctions request of its partner and Facebook. It's a ton of exhibits and transcripts. DM me if you want to dive into them but I didn't see much of interest beyond their attempts to avoid discovery on named plaintiff data. Image
for those who have watched the Cambridge Analytica cover-up over the years continue to play out, there was this mention by Facebook's lawyers claiming plaintiffs postponed depositions of Doug Purdy, Joseph Chancellor and Monika Bickert just last week. 👀 Image

• • •

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

Sep 17
just found some eye-popping stuff in google discovery under the examples of substantive chats (not deleted). you ready? it's between two key VPs (33+yrs collectively working at Google) and strikes at the intersection of privacy and antitrust as they began cookie deprecation. /1
All yellow highlights are mine. I am going to attempt to translate what is going on here based on my knowledge of all context around this chat and having reviewed and studied the company closely over the years. Correct me on anything you think I've got wrong please. /2
We know from prior reports, when Google announced 3rd party cookie deprecation, it also dropped super low quality methodology research (for G) that this would drop publishers' ad revenues by 52%. It appears they hoped this would cause "chrome to do something different." /3 Image
Read 12 tweets
Sep 11
Day 3: USvGoogle. Wow. “Google imposed debt on publishers” in damning evidence. After opening day with evasive top Google exec who ran adtech for both sides of market (but said “I believe so” to header bidding happening and AdX having 20% take rate), fireworks with DOJ expert. /1
Impressive DOJ expert Dr. Ravi systematically walked through conduct that had the interest conflicts lights blinking like fire alarms in Court. First, he testified 53% of Google's wins in auction were due to "First Look" (basically jumping in line to block) in Google's AdX. /2 Image
We saw an email exhibit explaining to leadership that "launching AdX into non-DFP servers destroys G's advantage leading to AdX losing access to overall queries with less valuable inventory begetting lower CPMs causing pubs to decrease G's access to their inventory. WTF. /3
Read 10 tweets
Sep 8
And so it begins. Tomorrow. US vs Google 2 antitrust trial. Google has had at least three off record briefings for press in the last month and just now posted its own propaganda blog post which no reporter should share the raw link without proper context. Just report on it. /1 Image
Google also posted its version of our adtech explainer. DCN focused on today and tomorrow but didn’t directly mention Google (only its conflicts of interest). Google focuses on today vs newspapers and takes credit for the web…as it likes to.

DCN on left, Google on right. /2

Like I said with Search after reading that complaint and knowing the business history, Google is screwed with adtech, too. DOJ and its attorneys did their homework, they know their stuff after years of study and discovery. I’m looking forward to the next four weeks. /3
Read 8 tweets
Aug 27
Motions hearing over. As expected, Google, and its Chief Legal Officer, Kent Walker, had an incredibly bad day as Court heard arguments over its abuse of privilege in the USA v Google adtech pre-trial motion. Scorched (imho) from the bench, “a very big problem for Google” /1
Since it’s no longer a trial, Court noted it wasn’t necessary to rule today but she made crystal clear, quotes as I captured them, “I’m comfortable saying this is not the way a respected corporate entity should function. A clear abuse of privilege.” /2
She said Google’s actions were “absolutely inappropriate and not proper” and said as each witness goes to the stand in trial, “I WILL DRAW INFERENCES.” and “will take into consideration as you call witnesses.” /3
Read 9 tweets
Aug 26
Nearly 300 more exhibits unsealed in last 24hrs for the Google adtech trial 9/9 in EDVA (on top of the 150 Friday). More insane illustrations of Google's market power, here showing how much of the ad spend in the global auctions run by Google comes through Google. Got that? /1 Image
These are all charts taking the wealth of data provided by Google to illustrate how much margin, marker power and conflicts of interest live with Google's services being on all sides of the advertising auctions (including tied to their search monopoly). /2 Image
So we start to see in unsealed emails how Google's market power is (ab)used. Here a top executive cites the 20% margins on auctions *tied* to the unique access to Google's AdWords demand (see monopoly power), and the suggestion of moving fees around to protect the margin. /3 Image
Read 7 tweets
Aug 23
As I mentioned, there are about 150 exhibits unsealed in last 24hrs for the Google adtech trial 9/9 in EDVA. I can post my highlights here if you find interesting.
Evidence is damning, trial will be lit. Basically Google sees 84% of the addressable ad market. That's insane. /1 Image
Google had slides like this which no sane monopolist under actual regulatory scrutiny would ever create. But back in the day... and we wonder why they see 84% of the ad market. /2 Image
On that note, Google will try to argue the market definition, "open web display," isn't valid but comically DOJ has soooo much evidence of it being used inside Google, outside Google, and even direct depositions backing it up. Like in Search case, G won't get far here. /3 Image
Read 29 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!

:(