The loss of Meta’s reputation in court could cost more than $375 million

Mexico’s Attorney General Raúl Torrez won a total of $375 million in a high-profile child protection case against Meta earlier this year. But the next phase of the battle could be very important for Meta and the social media industry.

Starting Monday, lawyers for Meta and New Mexico will return to a Santa Fe court for a three-week public nuisance trial, where they will argue the case. changes the AG wants the judge to order Create meta for Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp. These changes include age verification for users in New Mexico, banning end-user encryption for users under the age of 18 and using 90 hours per month, limiting content that stimulates interest such as unlimited scrolling and playback, and requiring Meta to identify 99 percent of new child-friendly content (CSAM).

“From the beginning, our goal was to try to change the way a company does business,” Torrez said. Seaside on a recent trip to Washington, DC, to advocate for new child protection laws. “I realize that even a $375 million investment in a large and profitable company is not enough to change the way they do business.” In fact, it is possible that there are some people in this company who see it as money to buy the business.

Although any changes ordered by the judge would only apply to Meta and its operations in New Mexico, the company may use changes in other states for the sake of simplicity. Or, as it is threatened to do sothere may be darkness in the state. The lawsuit could send a message to other tech companies that the courts will allow them to reform their businesses if found guilty.

In the lawsuit, New Mexico says Meta has become a public nuisance by causing accidents in the state. The AG’s office expects to call about 15 witnesses, including experts who will testify about the potential for the proposed cures, as well as actual witnesses who will testify about the alleged harm caused by Meta. After Meta’s defense, Judge Bryan Biedscheid will evaluate the merits and probabilities — a process that could take time, compared to the swift turnaround of the jury’s decision in March.

New Mexico’s big win could empower Torrez and thousands of other plaintiffs he is currently pursuing lawsuits against tech companies. On the other hand, a limited system can be a big problem. The results may not affect other cases, but they will significantly change the discussion in future meetings.

Several of Torrez’s requests are technical problems with buttons. Age verification would require Meta or a third-party provider to collect personal information about adults and children, which privacy advocates have consistently warned could make users less secure. Don McGowan, who previously worked at the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC), said that banning private communication on platforms like Facebook “is a good way to make sure that no one is using Facebook Messenger anymore and just moving their activities to other platforms that were not affected by this case.”

This authority will do little to change the reality of some business sectors – Meta announced recently to remove end-to-end encrypted messages on Instagram which it said “very few people” used.

Peter Chapman, executive director of the Knight-Georgetown Institute, which works to connect policymakers and others with independent scientific research, said there could be “significant changes” in banning encryption, and some changes would be more effective. For example, evidence provided by the government he pointed out that the concept of Meta that connects adults and children, something that presents a clear threat without much benefit, and which Torrez is also asking the court to stop. “There’s an opportunity to intervene and try to prevent these negative interactions from happening without addressing the cover-up,” Chapman said.

No single change will solve the entire problem of child and youth safety, Chapman said, which is why it’s notable that Torrez wants to ask for several changes. However, the effectiveness of any treatment will also depend on how it is used and evaluated. For example, what method does Meta use to describe the 99 percentile of new CSAM? How does it calculate or estimate what is not working? The same goes for the accuracy and reliability of any valid age verification.

Meta points to a potential problem in his arguments against Torrez’s claims. “Regardless of where the correct location is placed, Meta could not guarantee that the system meets that standard, because performing calculations would require Meta to identify 100% of the CSAM to use as a marker,” the company wrote in an official letter. Torrez’s deputy, James Grayson, said in a press conference that the court and an independent evaluator could have discretion in the follow-up; The office did not know the identity of this monitor.

Meta and other groups opposed to the AG’s approach say the proposed results are counterproductive. “The demands that are being made in New Mexico are unclear and provide more information about other abuses,” said Maureen Flatley, president of Stop Child Predators, a group that advocates for more money to be put into the enforcement of criminal laws against child predators. received money from Meta-backed NetChoice business team. “The idea that the planets are responsible for driving all of these people out would be like saying to the US Bankers Association, ‘Well, you’re responsible for the banking system from now on,’ which is ridiculous.”

“The New Mexico Attorney General’s focus on one platform is a misguided approach that ignores hundreds of other apps that young people use every day,” Meta spokesman Chris Sgro said in a statement. “The government’s proposed policies violate parental rights and prevent all Mexicans from free speech. Regardless, we continue to provide safe, age-appropriate experiences and have already implemented many of the government’s required safety measures, including 13 safety measures this past year.”

But Torrez has been focusing on the technology industry. He recently traveled to Washington, DC, to advocate for new child protection online and to reform Section 230, a law that protects technology platforms from prosecution for user posts. “Even though we were able to win in our district court in Santa Fe, I still think this law creates misunderstandings,” he said. Seaside on that trip. “If Section 230 wasn’t something these companies could hide from, it would increase their chances of bringing their case to court.”

But Chapman said that judicial control is not a “new issue” in the US. “Whether it’s tobacco, opioids, e-cigarettes, there’s a legal precedent to encourage greater discussion.”