
Facebook accused of massive fraud in new lawsuit filed by Cook County - Jerry2
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/03/cook-county-illinois-sues-facebook-and-cambridge-analytica-over-data-breach/
======
downandout
I wonder if the statute of limitations to sue Facebook over allowing the Obama
campaign “ingest the entire US social graph” [1] has expired. Red states and
Republicans should jump on this bandwagon too. Allowing Facebook data to be
used in elections is either fraud or it isn’t, regardless of whether the
candidate benefiting from it is the one the press likes or not.

[1] [https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/facebooks-
ru...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/facebooks-rules-for-
accessing-user-data-lured-more-than-just-cambridge-
analytica/2018/03/19/31f6979c-658e-43d6-a71f-afdd8bf1308b_story.html)

~~~
dragonwriter
> Allowing Facebook data to be used in elections is either fraud or it isn’t

No, that's not how fraud works.

~~~
downandout
I agree with you. But the attorney for Cook County, who filed this absurd
lawsuit, does not.

~~~
dragonwriter
I don't see evidence for that.

Particularly, I haven't seen any argument that Obama transferred information
out of its app for other uses, instead of using it within the app in exactly
the method allowed by FB’s public policies. While those policies may have been
laxer than some would prefer, the Illinois lawsuit relied heavily on the fact
that the info was used outside the parameters of those policies, while users
were ensured it would be used only within the policies, and that FB was aware
of the unauthorized use and failed to notify or arrest it, and indeed
benefited from it.

The thing that is charged as a violation is not “using Facebook data in an
election campaign”, but “using personal data without even the kind of consent
that comes from acting within public policied on how data will be used.”

~~~
downandout
_Particularly, I haven 't seen any argument that Obama transferred information
out of its app for other uses, instead of using it within the app in exactly
the method allowed by FB’s public policies._

That is actually not the case. The public policies at the time stated that the
data gleaned from any app was to be used solely for the purpose of operating
the app. Obama, however, with the full knowledge and consent of Facebook, used
this data for campaign strategy and ad targeting. They downloaded the entire
US social graph (also something no other app was allowed to do), and then used
that data far outside of the publicly disclosed purposes.

So if they can legitimately be sued for failing to do enough to stop Kogan/CA
from using the data in violation of publicly stated policies, they suffer even
_more_ liability in the Obama case, as they were active and willing
participants in Obama's activities that also violated the publicly stated
policies.

~~~
dragonwriter
> They downloaded the entire US social graph (also something no other app was
> allowed to do)

That would be germane to a campaign finance complaint (this appears to be an
issue of automatic flagging followed by discretionary response, which also
happened in the CA case, and those are fraught because it's very hard to say
that the terms and pricing were the same as generally available to other
customers and not an in-kind donation of special services), but not to the
kind of complaint being made here.

~~~
downandout
_That would be germane to a campaign finance complaint_

That may be, but the crux of the complaint - allowing third parties to use
data in a way that was not consistent with publicly disclosed policies - also
occurred in the Obama case. The only difference seems to be that the actions
of Facebook in assisting and endorsing the violations were willful in the
Obama case, whereas the allegation seems to be that they were simply negligent
in the Kogan/CA case.

~~~
dragonwriter
> whereas the allegation seems to be that they were simply negligent in the
> Kogan/CA case.

No, the allegations in the CA case—the specific lawsuit being discussed—is
that they were willful and based on Facebook’s corporate strategy of selling
itself on the basis of the platform as a tool to manipulate behavior.

~~~
downandout
Which is also what the Obama campaign took advantage of. The victims of the
Obama campaign - those that did not know that their data would be used in this
way and did not authorize it - approximately 199 million people - all have
causes of action against Facebook if this lawsuit is allowed to proceed.

~~~
dragonwriter
> Which is also what the Obama campaign took advantage of.

I was refuting an alleged difference.

> The victims of the Obama campaign - those that did not know that their data
> would be used in this way and did not authorize it - approximately 199
> million people - all have causes of action against Facebook if this lawsuit
> is allowed to proceed.

Well, no, even if we assume otherwise identical material facts, the state law
in this case has a three-year statute of limitations for private causes of
action.

Also, the Obama 2008 and 2012 campaign committees presumably were dissolved
years ago, so other than suing Facebook, there's no one to sue, even if the
statute of limitations wasn't an issue.

~~~
downandout
_Also, the Obama 2008 and 2012 campaign committees presumably were dissolved
years ago, so other than suing Facebook, there 's no one to sue, even if the
statute of limitations wasn't an issue._

There are exceptions that vary between jurisdictions with regard to the
Statute of Limitations, but you may be right that it has expired and there may
be nothing that can be done. If that issue can be overcome, you may also be
right that the Obama committees are gone, however Facebook has plenty of money
to go after.

------
dragonwriter
Cambridge Analytica and Facebook, the latter largely based on poor response
(which, along with some of Facebooks marketing, is used to suggest willful
cooperation) when the abuse by the former was discovered.

------
trisimix
Really digging this Facebook dogpili vibe.

------
mudil
“Facebook… is the largest data mining operation in existence.”

You know what? It's actually a true statement. Just add Google as a co-
conspirator.

