Facebook Moves to Dismiss Class Action Lawsuit Over Minors

Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.

Facebook Inc. asked a federal judge Tuesday to dismiss a class action lawsuit alleging that the social networking site used the names and pictures of underage children in advertisements without prior consent, arguing that no injury was done.

The Facebook privacy class action lawsuit claims that it is in violation of California state law to use a person’s name or likeness for commercial purposes without authorization from that person. Users agree under the membership terms that their names and pictures can be used in advertising, but the plaintiffs in the class action lawsuit are minors and shouldn’t be asked to consent to such an agreement, the claim states.

Facebook disagrees and says that no real harm has been done.

“Rather than alleging facts showing how Plaintiff’s themselves were injured, they make generic and entirely conclusory claims that Facebook deprived them of a “financial interest in their inherent right to control the use of their identity causing them actual financial harm,'” Facebook argued.

“Plaintiffs allege no facts suggesting that they have ever (or could have ever) received compensation for the alleged endorsements at issue here, nor that their prospects for doing so in the future have been diminished,” Facebook said in its motion to dismiss. “Plaintiffs’ claims fail because the law requires more than a simple declaration that one has been financially harmed.”

Facebook also takes issue with the plaintiffs’ argument that the social media company violated the California Family Code, an argument that was made in an Illinois federal court that was rejected by a judge there almost two years ago. The judge in that case would not invalidate the terms based on that argument, and in fact held the plaintiffs to the terms they agreed to when he transferred the case to the federal court in California.

The social media company argues that the plaintiffs “make improper, advisory rulings on hypothetical legal issues that are not presented in this case.”

For example, Facebook explains that the Plaintiffs are trying to seek a declaration that the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) isn’t able to preempt the California Family Code.

“The COPPA issue is not even ripe as to the only right-of-publicity statute at issue here, the Illinois statute, because that law has no parental consent requirement,” the motion states. “Consequently, the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction.”

Facebook also argues against the plaintiffs’ allegation that Illinois statutory claims negates Facebook’s terms of service choice-of-law provision.

“Because plaintiffs agreed, as a condition to using Facebook, to bring any claims they have under California law (and Judge Murphy has already enforced the [terms of service] against them), [the Illinois claims] must also fail,” the motion said.

The plaintiffs are represented by Steven A. Katz and Aaron M. Zigler of Korein Tillery LLC and Lee Squitieri of Squitieri & Fearon LLP.

The defendant is represented by Michael G. Rhodes, Matthew D. Brown and Jeffrey M. Gutkin of Cooley LLP.

The Facebook Minor Ad Class Action Lawsuit is C.M.D. et al. v. Facebook Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-01216, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. 

UPDATE: The Facebook minor ad class action lawsuit was dismissed on March 26, 2014.