A California man is suing Facebook for allegedly scanning the content of private messages sent between users of the site.
The suit alleges that Facebook scans the messages in search of hyperlinks sent between users. “If there is a link to a web page contained in that message, Facebook treats it as a ‘like’ of the page, and increases the page’s ‘like,’ counter by one,” the suit contends. The site tracks when users “like” pages in order to compile individual profiles that allow third parties to send targeted advertisements.
Related Story: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2591602
“When a Facebook user composes a message with a URL in the message’s body, Facebook generates a ‘URL preview,’ consisting of a brief description of the website and a relevant image from the website,” the suit adds. That “preview” creates two separate files, according to the suit.
One, called “EntShare,” is “tied to the specific user who sent the message.” The second file, “EntGlobalShare,” tracks all users who send a message containing the same URL.
It was first reported that Facebook was counting URLs sent in private messages as “likes” in 2012, but the site discontinued the practice shortly afterwards. However, plaintiffs allege, it is still spying on URLs included in messages for marketing purposes.
Related Story: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2571813
A motion granted on Wednesday by the District Court for the North District of California permits the plaintiff, Matthew Campbell, to seek “injunctive and declaratory relief” rather than financial damages. “We agree with the court’s finding that the alleged conduct did not result in any actual harm and that it would be inappropriate to allow plaintiffs to seek damages on a class-wide basis,” Facebook said in a statement.
The company added that its tracking amounted to “historical practices” that were “entirely lawful,” and said it was looking forward “to resolving those claims on the merits.” Campbell is set to file an amended complaint no later than June 8.
Facebook has been sued for invasive privacy practices in the past. That includes at least four lawsuits resulting from facial recognition technology employed by the site to retain more than a billion “facial templates.”
