Facebook parent Meta will pay $725M to settle user data case
San Francisco (AP): Facebook's corporate parent has agreed to pay 725 million to settle a lawsuit alleging the world's largest social media platform allowed millions of its users' personal information to be fed to Cambridge Analytica, a firm that supported Donald Trump's victorious presidential campaign in 2016.
Terms of the settlement reached by Meta Platforms, the holding company for Facebook and Instagram, were disclosed in court documents filed late Thursday. It will still need to be approved by a judge in a San Francisco federal court hearing set for March.
The case sprang from 2018 revelations that Cambridge Analytica, a firm with ties to Trump political strategist Steve Bannon, had paid a Facebook app developer for access to the personal information of about 87 million users of the platform. That data was then used to target U.S. voters during the 2016 campaign that culminated in Trump's election as the 45th president.
Uproar over the revelations led to a contrite Zuckerberg being grilled by U.S. lawmakers during a high-profile congressional hearing and spurred calls for people to delete their Facebook accounts. Even though Facebook's growth has stalled as more people connect and entertain themselves on rival services such as TikTok, the social network still boasts about 2 billion users worldwide, including nearly 200 million in the U.S. and Canada.
The lawsuit, which had been seeking to be certified as a class action representing Facebook users, had asserted the privacy breach proved Facebook is a "data broker and surveillance firm," as well as a social network.
The two sides reached a temporary settlement agreement in August, just a few weeks before a Sept. 20 deadline for Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and his long-time chief operating officer, Sheryl Sandberg, to submit to depositions.
The company based in Menlo Park, California, said in statement Friday it pursued a settlement because it was in the best interest of its community and shareholders.
"Over the last three years we revamped our approach to privacy and implemented a comprehensive privacy program," said spokesperson Dina El-Kassaby Luce. "We look forward to continuing to build services people love and trust with privacy at the forefront."
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Cash discovery row: SC grills Justice Yashwant Varma over his petition
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Monday questioned Justice Yashwant Varma over his plea to invalidate an in-house inquiry panel report indicting him over the discovery of huge cache of burnt cash from his official residence during his tenure as a Delhi High Court judge.
"Why did you appear before the inquiry committee? Did you come to the court that the video be removed? Why did you wait for the inquiry to be completed and the report be released? Did you take a chance of a favourable order there first," a bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and A G Masih asked senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who was representing Justice Varma.
The top court further quizzed Justice Varma over the parties he had made in his plea and said he should have filed the in-house inquiry report with his plea.
Sibal submitted there was a process under Article 124 (the Establishment and constitution of the Supreme Court), and a judge couldn't be a subject matter of public debate.
"The release of video on SC website, public furore, media accusations against judges are prohibited as per constitutional scheme," Sibal added.
The top court asked Sibal to come with one page bullet points and correct the memo of parties.
The matter was posted for July 30.
Justice Varma has sought quashing of the May 8 recommendation by then chief justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, urging Parliament to initiate impeachment proceedings against him.
His plea said the inquiry "reversed the burden of proof", requiring him to investigate and disprove the charges levelled against him.
Alleging that the panel's findings were based on a preconceived narrative, Justice Varma said the inquiry timelines were driven solely by the urge to conclude proceedings swiftly, even at the expense of "procedural fairness".
The petition contended that the inquiry panel drew adverse findings without affording him a full and fair hearing.
A report of the inquiry panel probing the incident had said Justice Varma and his family members had covert or active control over the store room where a huge cache of half-burnt cash was found following a fire incident, proving his misconduct which is serious enough to seek his removal.
The three-judge panel headed by Chief Justice Sheel Nagu of the Punjab and Haryana High Court conducted the inquiry for 10 days, examined 55 witnesses and visited the scene of the accidental fire that started at around 11.35 pm on March 14 at the official residence of Justice Varma, then a sitting judge of the Delhi High Court and now in the Allahabad High Court.
Acting on the report, then CJI Khanna wrote to President Droupadi Murmu and Prime Minister Narendra Modi recommending the judge's impeachment.
