throbber
Case 3:20-cv-06534-AGT Document 1 Filed 09/17/20 Page 1 of 36
`
`
`
`Mark N. Todzo (California Bar No. 168389)
`LEXINGTON LAW GROUP
`503 Divisadero Street
`San Francisco, CA 94117
`Telephone: 415-913-7800
`Facsimile: 415-759-4112
`mtodzo@lexlawgroup.com
`
`Christian Levis (pro hac vice forthcoming)
`Amanda Fiorilla (pro hac vice forthcoming)
`LOWEY DANNENBERG, P.C.
`44 South Broadway, Suite 1100
`White Plains, NY 10601
`Telephone: (914) 997-0500
`Facsimile: (914) 997-0035
`clevis@lowey.com
`afiorilla@lowey.com
`
`Anthony M. Christina (pro hac vice forthcoming)
`LOWEY DANNENBERG, P.C.
`One Tower Bridge
`100 Front Street, Suite 520
`West Conshohocken, PA 19428
`Telephone: (215) 399-4770
`Facsimile: (914) 997-0035
`achristina@lowey.com
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff Brittany Conditi
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`SAN FRANCISCO / OAKLAND DIVISION
`
`
`
`BRITTANY CONDITI, individually and on
`behalf of all others similarly situated,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`
`INSTAGRAM, LLC, a Delaware limited
`liability company, and FACEBOOK, INC., a
`Delaware corporation,
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`Case No.: ______________
`
`
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`CASE NO. ____________
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:20-cv-06534-AGT Document 1 Filed 09/17/20 Page 2 of 36
`
`
`
`Plaintiff Brittany Conditi, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, asserts
`
`the following against Defendants Instagram, LLC (“Instagram”) and Facebook, Inc. (“Facebook”)
`(collectively “Defendants”), based upon personal knowledge, where applicable, information and
`
`belief, and the investigation of counsel.
`
`SUMMARY OF ALLEGATIONS
`
`1.
`
`Instagram is a popular social media platform, wholly owned by Facebook, with
`
`approximately one billion annual active users.
`
`2.
`
`Instagram’s focus as a social media platform is based on allowing users to share
`
`photographs and videos with one another. Originally, users were only able to post photographs or
`
`videos to their Instagram “Feed,” which is a permanent collection of users’ content that others can
`interact with by viewing, commenting, or liking. In August 2016, Instagram launched “Stories,” a
`
`feature where users can post photographs or videos that disappear from view within a 24-hour
`
`period.
`
`3.
`
`As a social media platform that allows users to post photographs and videos,
`
`Instagram has access to a user’s smartphone camera for the limited purpose of allowing users to
`
`directly take a photograph or video and then post that content to its platform.
`
`4.
`
`Instagram claims to only access users’ smartphone cameras with user permission,
`such as when a user is interacting with the Instagram application’s (also referred to as an “app”)
`
`camera feature.
`
`5.
`
`For example, Instagram recently released a statement saying “[Instagram] only
`access[es] your camera when you tell us to—for example, when you swipe from Feed to Camera.”
`Instagram claims when its camera feature is not used, it does not access users’ smartphone cameras.1
`
`6.
`
`However, Instagram does more than it claims. Instagram is constantly accessing
`
`users’ smartphone camera feature while the app is open and monitors users without permission, i.e.,
`
`
`1
`Filipe Esposito, Instagram Promises to Fix Bug After Being Exposed By Always Accessing
`the Camera on iOS 14, 9TO5MAC, (July 25, 2020), https://9to5mac.com/2020/07/25/instagram-
`promises-to-fix-bug-after-being-exposed-by-always-accessing-the-camera-on-ios-14/.
`
`1
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`CASE NO. ____________
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:20-cv-06534-AGT Document 1 Filed 09/17/20 Page 3 of 36
`
`
`
`when users are not interacting with Instagram’s camera feature.
`
`7.
`
`This access goes beyond the services that Instagram promises to provide. Instagram
`
`has no legitimate reason for accessing users’ smartphone cameras when they are not using the
`
`Instagram camera feature.
`
`8.
`
`By doing so, Defendants have been able to monitor users’ most intimate moments,
`
`including those in the privacy of their own homes, in addition to collecting valuable insight and
`
`market research on its users.
`
`9.
`
`Defendants engage in this conduct for one main reason: to collect lucrative and
`
`valuable data on its users that it would not otherwise have access to. By obtaining extremely private
`
`and intimate personal data on their users, including in the privacy of their own homes, Defendants
`
`are able to increase their advertising revenue by targeting users more than ever before. For example,
`
`Defendants are able to see in-real time how users respond to advertisements on Instagram, providing
`
`extremely valuable information to its advertisers.
`
`10.
`
`The full extent and scope of Defendants’ conduct is only just beginning to come to
`light as a result of an update to the Apple Inc.’s (“Apple”) iPhone operating system, which provides
`
`notice to consumers when third parties are accessing their camera and microphone or collecting their
`
`data. The update to iPhone’s operating system was only made available to developers on June 22,
`
`2020, and to the general public on July 9, 2020.
`
`11.
`
`Defendants’ conduct constitutes an egregious violation of Plaintiff’s and Class
`members’ privacy rights, as established through California’s privacy laws. In addition, Defendants’
`
`actions constitute violations of the common law as well as several state and federal laws.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`12.
`
`This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C
`
`§ 1332(d), because the amount in controversy for the Class exceeds $5,000,000 exclusive of interest
`
`and costs, there are more than 100 putative class members, and minimal diversity exists because a
`
`significant portion of putative class members are citizens of a state different from the citizenship of
`
`Defendants.
`
`2
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`CASE NO. ____________
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:20-cv-06534-AGT Document 1 Filed 09/17/20 Page 4 of 36
`
`
`
`13.
`
`This Court has general personal jurisdiction over Defendants because their principal
`
`place of business is in California. Additionally, Defendants are subject to specific personal
`
`jurisdiction in California because a substantial part of the events and conduct giving rise to
`
`Plaintiff’s claims occurred in California.
`
`14.
`
`Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) because a substantial
`
`portion of the conduct described in this Complaint was carried out in this District. Furthermore,
`
`Defendants Instagram, LLC and Facebook, Inc. are headquartered in this District and subject to
`
`personal jurisdiction in this District.
`
`15.
`
`Intra-district Assignment (L.R. 3-2(c) and (e) and 3-5(b)): This action arises in
`
`San Mateo County, in that a substantial part of the events which give rise to the claims asserted
`
`herein occurred in San Mateo County. Pursuant to L.R. 3-2(e), all civil actions that arise in San
`
`Mateo County shall be assigned to either the San Francisco Division or Oakland Division.
`
`A.
`
`16.
`
`Plaintiff
`Plaintiff Brittany Conditi (“Plaintiff”) is a natural person and citizen of the State of
`
`PARTIES
`
`New Jersey and a resident of Bergen County.
`
`17.
`
`Plaintiff downloaded the Instagram application to her smartphone and regularly uses
`
`Instagram, including during intimate moments in private places. For example, on a routine basis
`
`Plaintiff uses her smartphone and the Instagram app while she is in her bedroom.
`
`18. Without her consent, Instagram secretly accessed Plaintiff’s smartphone camera and
`monitored Plaintiff—beyond the scope of any of the services that Instagram provides and while the
`Instagram camera feature was not in use—including in the privacy of her own home.
`
`B.
`
`19.
`
`Defendants
`
`Defendant Instagram, LLC is a limited liability company, organized and existing
`
`under the laws of the State of Delaware, with its principal place of business located at 1601 Willow
`
`Road, Menlo Park, CA 94025.
`
`3
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`CASE NO. ____________
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:20-cv-06534-AGT Document 1 Filed 09/17/20 Page 5 of 36
`
`
`
`20.
`
`Defendant Facebook, Inc. is the parent company of Instagram, LLC. Defendant
`
`Facebook, Inc. is a corporation, incorporated and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware,
`
`with its principal place of business located at 1601 Willow Road, Menlo Park, California 94025.
`
`21.
`
`Defendant Instagram is a wholly owned subsidiary of Defendant Facebook, Inc.
`
`Instagram is considered a “Facebook Product” and is provided to users “[b]y Facebook, Inc.”2 Both
`
`Instagram and Facebook “share technology, systems, insights, and information-including
`
`information [they] have about [users].”3
`
`FACTUAL BACKGROUND
`
`
`
`The History of Facebook and Instagram
`
`22.
`
`Facebook which was founded in 2004 by Mark Zuckerberg, Eduardo Saverin, Dustin
`
`Moskovitz, and Chris Hughes, first began as a new social media platform directed towards college
`
`students. By the end of the following year, Facebook had amassed over six million users.
`
`23.
`
`In 2006, Facebook expanded its membership from college students to anyone over
`
`the age of thirteen. Four years later, Facebook had not only surpassed “Myspace” as the most popular
`
`and most visited, social media platform, but it had also accomplished the difficult task of having
`
`over 400 million active users. To date, Facebook reports over 2.6 billion active users.
`
`24.
`
`Facebook’s rise to becoming the most popular social media platform in the United
`
`States was no small feat. During the process, and to maintain its dominance in the market, Facebook
`
`acquired several other social media platforms and other apps to boost its portfolio. Some of
`
`Facebook’s most popular acquisitions have included “WhatsApp” and “Instagram.”
`
`25.
`
`Instagram was launched as a social media platform in 2010 by Kevin Systrom. On
`
`the day the app launched it was downloaded over 25,000 times. A few short months later, Instagram
`
`surpassed one million active users. To date, Instagram has over one billion active annual users.
`
`
`2
`Terms of Use, INSTAGRAM, https://help.instagram.com/581066165581870 (last visited July
`30, 2020).
`3
`Id.
`
`4
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`CASE NO. ____________
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:20-cv-06534-AGT Document 1 Filed 09/17/20 Page 6 of 36
`
`
`
`26.
`
`Due to Instagram’s ever-increasing user base, Instagram began to garner attention
`
`from larger technology companies, such as Facebook, Twitter, and Benchmark Capital. After
`
`denying an offer to be bought-out by Twitter, Facebook eventually acquired Instagram for one
`
`billion dollars in 2012.
`
`27.
`
`Instagram has become a large part of Facebook’s overall revenue stream. For
`
`example, in 2019, Instagram brought in over $20 billion in advertising revenue, accounting for more
`
`than a quarter of Facebook’s total revenue that year.
`
`28. With access to so many users, Defendants have claimed to value full transparency
`
`and to respect user’s privacy. For example, Mark Zuckerberg claimed in an open letter while
`“Facebook and Instagram have helped people connect with friends, communities, and interests . . .
`people increasingly also want to connect privately.”4
`To that end, Mark Zuckerberg promised to build a “privacy-focused platform” and
`claimed to have “worked hard to build privacy into all our products, including those for public
`sharing.”5 These empty promises have not been fulfilled.
`
`29.
`
`30.
`
`As alleged herein, Defendants took advantage of Plaintiff and Class members by
`
`secretly accessing their smartphone cameras to monitor users beyond the scope of any services that
`
`Defendants agreed to provide, i.e., when users were not interacting with the Instagram camera
`
`feature.
`
`31.
`
`As a result, Defendants have been able to secretly spy on users, including Plaintiff
`
`and Class members, during intimate moments and in private places, such as their bedroom, to gather
`
`lucrative data to increase its advertising revenue.
`
`
`
`Instagram Watches Users Through Their Smartphone Cameras
`
`32.
`
`On July 25, 2020, reports emerged for the first time that Instagram was secretly
`
`
`4
`Mark Zuckerberg, A Privacy-Focused Vision for Social Networking, FACEBOOK, (Mar. 6,
`https://www.facebook.com/notes/mark-zuckerberg/a-privacy-focused-vision-for-social-
`2019),
`networking/10156700570096634/.
`5
`Id.
`
`5
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`CASE NO. ____________
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:20-cv-06534-AGT Document 1 Filed 09/17/20 Page 7 of 36
`
`
`
`accessing and spying on users through their smartphone camera without their consent.
`
`33.
`
`Users were able to discover that Instagram was secretly monitoring them through a
`
`new update to Apple’s smartphone operating system.
`Apple’s latest operating system (“iOS”) update has been declared a “game-changer”
`
`34.
`
`by Forbes, specifically because it allows users to see exactly how companies access and use their
`
`personal information.6
`
`35.
`
`Apple released iOS 14 to developers on June 22, 2020, and the general public on July
`
`9, 2020. Among other things, the update allows users to see which applications are accessing their
`
`camera or microphone, which reportedly “exposed” Instagram’s conduct.
`The update informs users by a green “camera on” indicator that companies, such as
`
`36.
`
`Instagram, are monitoring them through their camera. Instagram users were notified by the green
`
`“camera on” indicator that Instagram was accessing, and monitoring them through, their cameras
`while they were not using Instagram’s camera feature and for reasons beyond any “service” that
`
`Instagram claims to provide.
`
`37.
`
`Instagram is not the only company who has been caught spying on users as a result
`
`of Apple’s latest update. TikTok, LinkedIn, and Reddit all face scrutiny for copying user’s clipboard
`
`information after Apple began providing similar notifications whenever this occurred.
`
`38.
`
`In a statement, Instagram claimed to “only access your camera when you tell us to—
`for example when you swipe from Feed to Camera.”7 Instagram’s data policy provides similar
`
`assurances about the services it does, and does not, provide, and when it collects information and
`
`data.
`
`39.
`
`Instagram’s data policy states that it can collect information, such as “what you see
`
`Davey Winder, Apple iOS 14 Exposes Microsoft’s LinkedIn App Reading Clipboard Data,
`6
`FORBES, (July 4, 2020), https://www.forbes.com/sites/daveywinder/2020/07/04/apple-ios-14-
`catches-microsofts-linkedin-spying-on-clipboard-tiktok-apps-privacy-iphone-ipad-
`macbook/#10c5380f5896.
`Kim Lyons, An Instagram bug showed a ‘camera on’ indicator for iOIS 14 devices even
`7
`when
`users
`weren’t
`taking
`photos,
`THE
`VERGE,
`(July
`25,
`2020),
`https://www.theverge.com/2020/7/25/21338151/instagram-bug-camera-privacy-ios14-apple.
`
`6
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`CASE NO. ____________
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:20-cv-06534-AGT Document 1 Filed 09/17/20 Page 8 of 36
`
`
`
`through features we provide, such as our camera, so [Instagram] can do things like suggest masks
`
`and filters that you might like, or give you tips on using camera formats.”8 Instagram discloses that
`it collects “information about how you use features like our camera.”9
`However, nowhere in Instagram’s data policy does it disclose that, when users are
`not using its camera feature, Instagram is secretly accessing users’ smartphone camera to monitor
`
`40.
`
`individuals, such as Plaintiff. This is beyond the scope of services that Instagram provides and
`
`Instagram has no legitimate reason to access users’ smartphone cameras while they are not
`interacting with Instagram’s camera feature.
` Instagram’s conduct in secretly monitoring users constitutes an egregious violation
`
`41.
`
`of their privacy rights, especially because many users, including Plaintiff, were monitored in the
`
`privacy of their own home.
`
`42.
`
`Defendants abused their ability to access users’ smartphone cameras, and committed
`
`egregious privacy violations, for one specific reason: to increase their advertising revenue. By
`
`obtaining extremely private and intimate personal data on their users, including in the privacy of
`
`their own home, Defendants are able to target users more than ever before.
`
`43.
`
`Facebook has acknowledged the impact that Apple’s update to its operating system
`
`will pose to its potential advertising revenue, which it earns through its extensive data collection.
`
`Since Apple began rolling out its latest operating system update, which gives users unprecedented
`
`control over their own data, Facebook has begun meeting with its most notable advertising partners
`
`to discuss its potential repercussions.
`
`44.
`
`Apple’s Chief Financial Officer, David Wehner, told CNBC that it believes Apple’s
`update will “make it harder for app developers and others to grow ads on Facebook and
`
`
`8
`Data Policy, INSTAGRAM,
`https://help.instagram.com/519522125107875?helpref=page_content (last visited July 30, 2020).
`9
`Id.
`
`7
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`CASE NO. ____________
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:20-cv-06534-AGT Document 1 Filed 09/17/20 Page 9 of 36
`
`
`
`elsewhere.”10 Considering that Instagram’s advertising revenue constitutes a significant part of
`Facebook’s overall revenue, it’s not surprising the lengths they would go in pursuit of obtaining
`users’ data for advertising purposes, regardless of the privacy violations they commit in the process.
`
`
`
`Instagram Does Not Obtain Consent or Disclose That it Monitors Users
`Instagram does not obtain users’ consent to access their smartphone cameras while
`users are not interacting with Instagram’s camera feature.
`Nowhere in Instagram’s data policy does it disclose that it (1) accesses users’
`
`45.
`
`46.
`
`smartphone camera while the Instagram camera feature is not in use; or (2) obtain consent to do so.
`
`47.
`
`Nor could it. Instagram has no legitimate purpose for accessing users’ smartphone
`cameras while they are not using Instagram’s services, i.e., accessing Instagram’s camera feature.
`Since this is not a part of any services that Instagram provides, and Instagram claims to “only access
`your camera when you tell us to,” users could in no way consent to this conduct.
`Rather, Instagram has claimed this was simply a “mistake” because of “a bug in iOS
`14 Beta that [ ] indicates that some people are using the camera when they aren’t.”11 iOS is Apple’s
`proprietary operating system. Apple has not acknowledged that there is any “bug” in its software
`
`48.
`
`that would affect the operation of Instagram.
`
`49.
`
`Tellingly, Facebook came under similar scrutiny for also accessing users’
`smartphone cameras last year. Users reported that the camera for “Facebook Stories,” similar to
`
`Instagram Stories, would open in the background while they were watching videos or viewing
`
`pictures on Facebook.
`
`50.
`
`Similar to Instagram, Facebook claimed this was a “bug” and entirely inadvertent.12
`
`
`10
`Filipe Esposito, Facebook raises concerns that iOS 14 could harm its ad business,
`9TO5MAC, (July 30, 2020), https://9to5mac.com/2020/07/30/facebook-raises-concerns-that-ios-14-
`could-harm-its-ad-business/.
`11
`Kim Lyons, supra note 9.
`Jay Peters, Facebook’s iOS app might be opening the camera in the background without
`12
`your
`knowledge,
`THE
`VERGE
`(Nov.
`12,
`2019),
`https://www.theverge.com/2019/11/12/20961332/facebooks-ios-app-reportedly-camera-
`background-security.
`
`8
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`CASE NO. ____________
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:20-cv-06534-AGT Document 1 Filed 09/17/20 Page 10 of 36
`
`
`
`Notably, neither company came forward about these “bugs” until after users discovered what they
`were doing through Apple’s update to its operating system.
`
`51.
`
`As Instagram denies that it monitors users while its camera function is not in use,
`
`this is not listed as one of the services Instagram promises to provide its users nor is it listed as one
`
`of the ways Instagram collects user data.
`
`52.
`
`Similarly, since Instagram does not disclose this practice, there is no way for users
`
`to provide consent to be monitored through their smartphone camera while they are not engaging
`
`with Instagram’s camera function.
`
`
`
`Instagram’s Conduct Violates the California Consumer Privacy Act
` The California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”) protects consumers’ personal
`53.
`
`information from collection and use by businesses without providing proper notice and obtaining
`
`consent.
`
`54.
`
`Instagram and Facebook are required to comply with the CCPA because they
`
`individually earn more than $25 million in annual gross revenue. Additionally, the CCPA applies to
`
`Defendants because they buy, sell, receive, or share, for commercial purposes, the personal
`
`information of more than 50,000 consumers, households, or devices.
`
`55.
`
`The CCPA requires that a business who collects consumer’s personal information,
`such as Defendants, disclose either “at or before the point of collection . . . the categories of personal
`
`information to be collected and the purposes for which the categories of personal information shall
`
`be used. See Cal. Civ Code § 1798.100(b).
`
`56.
`
`Furthermore, “[a] business shall not collect additional categories of personal
`
`information or use personal information collected for additional purposes without providing the
`
`consumer with notice consistent with this section.” See id.
`
`57.
`
`Defendants violated the CCPA by failing to disclose that it monitors users through
`
`their smartphone camera, while it’s not in use, to collect personal information. Instagram only
`
`9
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`CASE NO. ____________
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:20-cv-06534-AGT Document 1 Filed 09/17/20 Page 11 of 36
`
`
`
`discloses that it collects “information about how you use features like our camera.”13 Since users
`were not interacting with Instagram’s camera feature at the time they were monitored, and
`
`Defendants failed to disclose its conduct, Defendants violated the CCPA.
`
`
`
`Instagram Users Have a Reasonable Expectation of Privacy
`
`58.
`
` Plaintiff and Class members have a reasonable expectation of privacy not to be
`
`watched and monitored without their permission. This expectation of privacy is deeply enshrined in
`
`California’s Constitution.
`Article I, section 1 of the California Constitution provides: “All people are by nature
`
`59.
`
`free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and
`
`liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety,
`
`happiness, and privacy.” Art. I., Sec. 1, Cal. Const. [Emphasis added].
`The phrase “and privacy” was added in 1972 after voters approved a proposed
`
`60.
`
`legislative constitutional amendment designated as Proposition 11. Critically, the argument in favor
`
`of Proposition 11 reveals that the legislative intent was to curb businesses’ control over the
`unauthorized collection and use of consumers’ personal information, stating in relevant part:
`
`
`
`The right of privacy is the right to be left alone . . . It prevents government and
`business interests from collecting and stockpiling unnecessary information about us
`and from misusing information gathered for one purpose in order to serve other
`purposes or to embarrass us.
`
`Fundamental to our privacy is the ability to control circulation of personal
`information. This is essential to social relationships and personal freedom. The
`proliferation of government and business records over which we have no control
`limits our ability to control our personal lives. Often we do not know that these
`records even exist and we are certainly unable to determine who has access to them.14
`
`
`(Emphasis added).
`
`61.
`
`Consistent with this language, an abundance of studies examining the collection of
`
`consumers’ personal data confirms that the surreptitious monitoring of millions of individuals, as
`
`13
`Data Policy, INSTAGRAM,
`https://help.instagram.com/519522125107875?helpref=page_content (last visited Aug. 19, 2020).
`14
`Ballot Pamp., Proposed Amends. to Cal. Const. with arguments to voters, Gen. Elec. (Nov.
`7, 1972) at 27.
`
`10
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`CASE NO. ____________
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:20-cv-06534-AGT Document 1 Filed 09/17/20 Page 12 of 36
`
`
`
`Instagram has done here, violates expectations of privacy that have been established as general
`
`social norms. Privacy polls and studies uniformly show that the overwhelming majority of
`
`Americans consider one of the most important privacy rights to be the need for an individual’s
`affirmative consent before a company collects and shares its customers’ personal data.
`
`62.
`
`For example, a recent study by Consumer Reports shows that 92% of Americans
`
`believe that internet companies and websites should be required to obtain consent before selling or
`
`sharing their data and the same percentage believe internet companies and websites should be
`
`required to provide consumers with a complete list of the data that has been collected about them.15
`
`63. Moreover, according to a study by Pew Research, a majority of Americans,
`
`approximately 79%, are concerned about how data is collected about them by companies. Pew
`
`Research also found that 85% of Americans are concerned about the personal information social
`
`media sites know about them.
`
`64.
`
`Instagram has failed to obtain adequate consent to access users’ smartphone camera
`while users are not interacting with Instagram’s camera feature and has chosen to secretly monitor
`users without their permission. This constitutes a violation of Plaintiff’s and Class members’ privacy
`
`interests, including those explicitly enshrined in the California Constitution.
`
`
`
`Facebook’s and Instagram’s Shared History of Privacy Violations
`Since its inception in 2004, Facebook’s core business model has been monetizing
`65.
`user information. As the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) noted in a 2019 complaint against
`Facebook, “substantially all of Facebook’s $55.8 billion in 2018 revenues came from advertising.”16
`It is therefore no surprise that Facebook’s fortune rises only at the expense of its users, as evidenced
`by Facebook’s long history of data abuse and privacy violations.
`For example, back in 2007, when Facebook launched “Facebook Beacon,” users
`
`66.
`
`were unaware that their online activity was tracked, and that the privacy settings originally did not
`
`
`15
`Consumers Less Confident About Healthcare, Data Privacy, and Car Safety, New Survey
`Finds, CONSUMER REPORTS (May 11, 2017), https://www.consumerreports.org/consumer-
`reports/consumers-less-confident-about-healthcare-data-privacy-and-car-safety/.
`16
`United States v. Facebook, Inc., Case No. 19-cv-2184.
`
`11
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`CASE NO. ____________
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:20-cv-06534-AGT Document 1 Filed 09/17/20 Page 13 of 36
`
`
`
`allow users to opt-out. As a result of widespread criticism, Facebook Beacon was eventually shut
`
`down.
`
`67.
`
`Just two short years later, Facebook made controversial modifications to its Terms
`
`of Service, which allowed Facebook to use anything a user uploaded to its site for any purpose, at
`
`any time, even after the user ceased to use Facebook. The Terms of Service also failed to provide
`
`anyway for users to completely delete their accounts. Under immense public pressure, Facebook
`
`eventually returned to its previous Terms of Service.
`
`68.
`
`In November of 2011, Facebook agreed to settle FTC charges that it repeatedly failed
`
`to keep promises concerning user privacy, including claims that Facebook promised users it would
`
`not share personal information with advertisers. Jon Leibowitz, Chairman of the FTC, warned
`
`“Facebook is obligated to keep the promises about privacy that it makes to its hundreds of millions
`of users . . . Facebook’s innovation does not have to come at the expense of consumer privacy.”17
`
`69.
`
`The resulting Consent Order prohibited Facebook from misrepresenting the extent to
`
`which consumers can control the privacy of their information, the steps that consumers must take to
`
`implement such controls, and the extent to which Facebook makes user information accessible to
`
`third parties.18
`
`70.
`
`But this was not the last time Facebook abused users’ data. In 2015, a journalist for
`The Guardian reported that Cambridge Analytica was using data harvested from millions of users’
`
`Facebook accounts mostly without user consent.
`
`71.
`
`In 2018, Facebook testified before Congress that Cambridge Analytica may have
`
`harvested the data of up to 87 million users in connection with the 2016 election. This led to yet
`
`another FTC investigation in 2019 into Facebook’s data collection and privacy practices, resulting
`
`in a record-breaking five billion dollar settlement.
`
`72.
`
`Acknowledging that Facebook does not “currently have a strong reputation for
`building privacy protective services,” Mark Zuckerberg promised to build a “privacy-focused
`
`
`17
`Id.
`18 Fed. Trade Comm’n., In re Facebook, Decision and Order, FTC File No. 092 3184 (Jul. 27, 2012)
`
`12
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`CASE NO. ____________
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:20-cv-06534-AGT Document 1 Filed 09/17/20 Page 14 of 36
`
`
`
`platform” and assured users that it has “worked hard to build privacy into all our products, including
`those for public sharing.”19
`
`73.
`
`Despite these promises, Facebook has continued to fail to live up to its promises. In
`
`April 2019, a cybersecurity firm found that millions of Facebook records were made public on
`
`Amazon’s cloud computing server, which were “accessible and downloadable for anyone who could
`find them online.”20
`
`74.
`
`Even more significant, Facebook has come under scrutiny for nearly the same exact
`
`thing Instagram is alleged to have done here. In November of 2019, The Verge reported that
`
`“Facebook’s iOS app appears to be activating the camera in the background of the app in some
`situations without a user’s knowledge.”21 Like here, Facebook’s conduct was only revealed by users
`with iPhones running a new version of Apple’s operating software. Tellingly, Facebook, like
`Instagram here, claimed that this was merely a “bug” that they would fix.
`
`75.
`
`Instagram has followed a similar path of repeated privacy violations as its parent
`
`company. In 2012, shortly after being acquired by Facebook, Instagram announced sweeping
`
`changes to its Terms of Service disclosing that “a business or other entity may pay” Instagram for
`the use of a users’ images “without any compensation [to the user].”22 The changes also allowed
`
`Instagram to disclose user data to Facebook and third-party advertisers. Even worse, Instagram
`
`proposed that parents of minors implicitly consented to the use of their children’s images for
`
`
`19
`Mark Zuckerberg, A Privacy-Focused Vision for Social Networking, FACEBOOK, (Mar. 6,
`https://www.facebook.com/notes/mark-zuckerberg/a-privacy-focused-vision-for-social-
`2019),
`networking/10156700570096634/.
`20
`Sarah Frier, Matt Day & Josh Eidelson, Hundreds of Millions of Facebook User Records
`Exposed
`on
`Amazon
`Cloud
`Servers,
`LA
`TIMES,
`(April
`3,
`2019),
`https://www.lat

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket