Whoa. A super late Fri night unsealed doc in lawsuit Facebook is trying to settle for record $700+ million. It includes this long-hidden Sep '18 "Status and Re-scoped Approach" from the unprecedented audit Mark Zuckerberg promised Congress during Cambridge Analytica scandal. /1
Pop some corn or make some coffee if you're awake. The Judge in the case ordered some items unsealed by midnight Friday night. Again, they're trying to settle but Facebook's law firm is also going through sanctions for discovery abuse so Court is ordering stuff unsealed. /2
Reminder, here is what Zuckerberg promised Congress. They have attempted to keep even the names of the two consultants sealed for years but failed because they promised the public they would do the audit to keep us safe. Not just for legal reasons. /3
This was the timeline. It looks like the project was kicked off in May at the "Project Analytica Summit." A catchy name I suppose. Reminder, this was basically to investigate the extent that their entire app platform was leaking data as they hacked for growth. /4
These were the apps that appear to have been immediately escalated as high-priority. Gibson Dunn being the lawyers, FTI and Stroz the secret forensic consultants. Any apps that stand out, let me know. Definitely AIQ and Mail.ru. /5
Get this. Over 2 million apps fit the P0 priority list meaning they were created before 2015 and had access to sensitive user and friends' permissions. So again, that seems like a lot to me but what do I know. It's a big platform. /6
Let's get to where things start to get even more interesting. High-risk countries for all of that accessible personal data across the Facebook platform. Russian developers in Iran? China? Russia? Yes, TikTok 2023 seems super, super benign compared to this. /7
WTF. "Developers by Predicted Country." Again, this is from audit to see if Facebook had other Cambridge Analyticas - apps harvesting our personal data. /8
*China 86,961
Cuba 250
*Iran 2,533
**North Korea 21
*Russia 42,078
Sudan 647
*Syria 929
Ukraine 34,624
Vietnam 76,813
Again, reminder. The Sept 17, 2018 presentation is titled: "Status and Rescoped Approach." Why? Well sure enough slide 16 says, "Now is an opportunity to reflect and consider alternative approaches to better risk-calibrate the investigation." /9
They appeared to have been super early in the app investigation and already had a timeline to move it in-house, re-calibrate how deep they would really go. At that time, Zuckerberg and Sandberg were refusing summons from international parliaments. SEC was likely a major risk. /10
And a key enforcer, @ICOnews investigation was soon shut down informing public FB never even followed up on Cambridge Analytica servers afterward which Zuckerberg had told Congress was a priority. And then $5B+ of settlements shut down the FTC and SEC. /11
I'm going to link to full doc / report here so you can see everything. There were some other documents unsealed tonight, too. Likely more to come. Again, they chose to settle this private suit within weeks of Zuckerberg and Sandberg depositions. /12 storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
Here is a link to prior threads if you want to dig around a bit on it. Again, they spent years avoiding depositions and discovery before settling as discovery was underway for Zuckerberg and Sandberg and depositions imminent. Surprise! /13
And a bit more on the actual settlement including the final tweet of @SenatorMenendez rightly questioning the testimony of Zuckerberg. Facebook rushed him to town before they started the app audit, etc. Better to testify before everyone knew too much. /14
Before I close, I normally say anything in yellow is my highlighting as I go through documents. Thanks for digging in. I'll see if anyone else comes up with more intel in the morning. Thanks again for Facebook for having its news buried on a Friday night. We appreciate it. /15
Here is a thread connecting the risk of the same data being harvested in Russia as Zuckerberg minimized to Senate. It’s highly likely no one in the US enforcement ever saw this doc as FB claimed privilege, they never litigated and instead settled for over $5 billion. /16
And consistent with my last tweet, UK Parliament was even further ahead pressing for answers. But UK, Canada and other international enforcement def wouldn’t have seen this doc if US didn’t. @DamianCollins led UK inquiry. He didn’t see it or the audit. /17
wow. NdCal just denied Facebook's attempt to dismiss securities suit for Cambridge Analytica cover-up. Court says plaintiffs credibly alleged Zuckerberg and Sandberg knew it "possessed over 40mil user profiles" way earlier. 4th amended complaint added/redacted cited evidence. /1
Count I, II and III now proceed, all alleged (civil) violations of 1934 SEC Act including over $5B in stock sales by Zuckerberg. This is the case Facebook already took up to SCOTUS to be denied cert. In DE, they settled similar case as director Andreessen was set to testify. /2
In this case, the executive defendants are Zuckerberg, Sandberg and CFO Wehner. What is interesting is it's added new evidence squeezed out more recently in courts including Court sanctions against Sandberg for deleting "relevant emails" over a pseudonymous gmail account. /3
Big. A major new law & tech paper takes on the economics of behavioral advertising - the kind that tracks users across multiple businesses and contexts, not just on sites they choose to visit.
It challenges industry’s favorite claim: that tracking is a “win-win” for everyone. /1
Bear with my thread. You may know I've been sharing Google and Meta monopoly abuse concerns for nearly a decade (courts now ruling). That said, I've always said ubiquitous data collection across the web (mostly NOT on the duopoly's own services!) is what fuels their dominance. /2
At the heart of the debate is this Figure 1 - and two very different ways to frame it.
Framing #1 (the industry narrative): Data aka 'signal' -> Better targeting -> More relevant ads -> More revenue -> Free content -> Everyone wins!
Simple. Elegant. But entirely misleading. /3
The 8hr video of Jack Smith’s testimony was released by Congress on New Years’ Eve in between Epstein and Venezuela. It’s an extraordinary display of Smith’s integrity and attention to justice and fairness on 1/6. Allison Gill deserves praise for curating the key clips. 1/4
Smith clearly represents all who worked towards justice and public interest, expressing his confidence and rationale he had the evidence to prove Jan 6th case to a jury. He also shows his gratitude to those retaliated against - in just doing their jobs. This stood out to me. 2/4
I must say I’m impressed by Covington & Burling law firm who has stood strong during this retaliation. This is just 1/6 - they’ve worked with Smith to be cautious to not discuss any confidential details in his classified docs report still sealed by Judge Cannon. (1.3x to fit) 3/4
So many mind blowing sentences in this just incredible Wall Street Journal report. Starting here, “Witkoff, who hasn’t traveled to Ukraine this year, is set to visit Russia for the sixth time next week and will again meet Putin. He insisted he isn’t playing favorites.” /1
“Inside were details of the commercial and
economic plans the Trump administration had been pursuing with Russia, including jointly mining rare earths in the Arctic.” /2
“European official asked Witkoff to start speaking with allies over the secure fixed line Europe's heads of state use to conduct sensitive
diplomatic conversations. Witkoff demurred, as he traveled too much to use the cumbersome system.” /3
Saturday’s “No Kings” protests have filled front pages across America with impactful visuals and headlines of peaceful protests. Many included the eye popping NYC Times Square shot. Here in the Dothan Eagle (Alabama). But everyone turned out. See Montana in its Missoulian. /1
Plenty of big city energy from St. Louis, Missouri to Chicago, Illinois. /2
Midwest with Cleveland, Ohio to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. /3
US v Google remedies: Nothing groundbreaking from return of DOJ’s star economist this morning. Court tested if his concerns over solely behavioral remedies assume distrust in Google (won’t follow court orders). I don’t think it mattered relative to where we were last night... /1
Yes, some will read as leaning against structural-remedy interest. I took it simply her clarifying she doesn’t need to lean on distrust if structural is shown tech feasible. Although witness pointed out distrust harms competition investment levels. /2
Court also very much nodded head when witness Lee explained why he didn’t do “but for” analysis to a dollar amount. Mehta also determined in search it was infeasible and unnecessary so cross that out of Google’s defense imho. /3