Meta Fails to Escape Billionaire’s Crypto Scam Ad Lawsuit
A U.S. judge has turned down Meta Platform’s request to dismiss a lawsuit brought by billionaire Australian mining mogul Andrew Forrest. The lawsuit accuses Meta of running Facebook ads that used deepfake images of Forrest to promote fraudulent cryptocurrency schemes. Judge Casey Pitts, from California District Court, issued the decision on Monday, June 17, allowing Forrest to re-file his suit. Forrest aims to show that Meta’s negligence in allowing scam ads violated its duty to run its operations in a “commercially reasonable manner.”
Meta’s defense revolved around Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, arguing that it shielded the company from liability as a publisher of third-party content. This line of defense had previously been cited unsuccessfully by YouTube to duck responsibility for similar crypto scam ads. Section 230, a law nearly 30 years old, asserts that providers of an “interactive computer service” will not be treated as the publisher of content provided by another entity.
Judge Pitts determined that Meta had not presented a definitive argument that Section 230 granted it complete immunity against Forrest’s claims. She indicated that Meta failed to establish beyond doubt that Section 230 offered a full-proof affirmative defense to the allegations brought forth by Forrest.
Forrest interpreted this ruling as a landmark decision, noting it marked the first time a social media firm in U.S. civil court failed to invoke Section 230 successfully to dodge civil liability tied to its advertising business. He pointed out that the ruling opens the door for them to prove in court that Facebook can and should prevent displaying scam ads on its platform while refusing to assume any responsibility.
The revised lawsuit could aim to show that Meta not only misappropriated Forrest’s name and likeness but also benefited from the scam advertisements. Forrest’s claim suggests that Meta earned more profit from ads featuring his image than it would have otherwise. Judge Pitts concurred, stating that Forrest had sufficiently pleaded that the alleged misappropriation was advantageous to Meta.
Judge Pitts found that Forrest plausibly argued that Meta had an active role in crafting the ads in question. Forrest maintained that Meta was actively involved in the appearance and targeting of these ads through its advertiser tools.
The judge underscored that these claims introduced a factual dispute about whether Meta’s ad systems were neutral tools that anyone could use or misuse, or whether the tools themselves contributed to the content of the ads. This contention adds complexity to the case, making it a critical issue to be examined during the trial.
Earlier this year, Australian prosecutors decided not to continue with the criminal charges against Meta related to the deepfake crypto scam ads, citing insufficient evidence. Forrest, known as the founder of iron ore producer Fortescue Metals Group, has a net worth estimated by Forbes at $16.6 billion.
26 thoughts on “Meta Fails to Escape Billionaire’s Crypto Scam Ad Lawsuit”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Excellent move by the judge. Let’s hope this ruling will change the way social media handles scam ads.
If Meta had any respect for its users, they’d work harder to prevent this kind of fraud from happening.
Meta benefiting from scam ads? It’s disgraceful and unethical. They need to clean up their act.
Wonderful to see the courts holding big tech accountable! This is a win for everyone affected by these scams.
This case shows the cracks in Metas facade. Profiting from scam ads while ignoring their impact? Unforgivable.
Fantastic ruling! Social media giants need to be held accountable for scam ads. Well done, Forrest!
So tired of these tech giants playing the victim card under Section 230. Meta needs to take some responsibility for the garbage they promote.
Enough with using Section 230 to dodge liability! If Meta can’t control its own platform, then what good is it?
What a win for consumers everywhere! 🏆 Meta can’t keep hiding behind outdated laws. Well done, Forrest! 🙌
Fantastic news! Meta should take responsibility for what happens on its platform. Great job, Judge Pitts!
Forrest has a solid point. Meta can’t just shrug their shoulders and say not our problem when scams are running rampant on their platform.
Bravo to Judge Pitts for making the right call! It’s high time these platforms were held to account for their ads.
This is an important step forward! 🛤️ Meta needs to own up to its role in spreading scam ads. Well done, Judge Pitts! 👩⚖️
Go Forrest! This ruling is a game-changer. Let’s hope more people take note of Meta’s negligence.
I can’t believe Meta still uses Section 230 as a defense! Feels like they’re just trying to escape accountability. 😠
Kudos to Andrew Forrest for taking a stand! This is a crucial win against fraudulent ads on social media.
Meta, how could you let scam ads using deepfakes just slip by? That’s seriously irresponsible.
This is the kind of accountability we need from big tech! Way to go, Forrest and Judge Pitts!
Awesome ruling! 🌟 Section 230 shouldn’t be a free pass for platforms to allow scams. Let’s see justice served. ⚖️
Finally, someone is standing up to Meta! 👏 Deepfakes and scams need to be stopped. Kudos to Andrew Forrest! 💥
It’s high time these social media companies get reeled in. No more hiding behind outdated laws. 🌐⚖️
This is what justice looks like! Hopefully, this will lead to more stringent measures against scam ads. Thanks, Judge Pitts!
Such a landmark decision! Finally, the courts are holding social media platforms accountable for their role in spreading scams.
Quite ridiculous that Meta can’t seem to figure out how to stop scams on their own platform.
Judge Pitts just made history! Hopefully, this ruling will make Meta and others rethink their approach to scam ads.
Finally, some accountability! Kudos to Judge Pitts for making this bold decision. Hopefully, this will deter these big platforms from allowing scam ads.