Meta settlement overview:
- Who: Meta Platforms Inc. has reached a settlement with 52 state and territorial attorneys general.
- Why: The settlement resolves claims that Meta violated state consumer protection laws and the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA).
- Where: The Meta settlement was reached in California federal court.
- How to get help: If you or your child developed signs of social media addiction before age 18 and were diagnosed with a related mental health condition, you may be eligible to pursue a social media lawsuit.
Meta Platforms has reached a settlement worth up to $17.1 billion with 52 state and territorial attorneys general to resolve claims the social media company hid or downplayed its platforms’ allegedly harmful impact on minors.
Under the agreement, Meta will initially pay $12.19 billion over 10 years. The total could increase to $17.1 billion if other major social media companies adopt certain reforms and meet additional payment requirements. The Meta settlement covers claims brought by 52 state and territorial attorneys general.
The parties filed a proposed consent judgment on Aug. 26, asking the federal court to enter the agreement and resolve the claims. The proposed consent judgment still requires court approval. Meta denies the allegations and any liability to the states.
The agreement follows more than two years of settlement discussions involving attorneys and technical experts for the parties. The states and Meta said the proposed consent judgment would resolve the state-law and federal COPPA claims without further litigation.
Meta settlement requires changes to Facebook, Instagram
According to the proposed consent judgment, Meta must implement several changes intended to address the allegations involving social media addiction of young users.
The settlement agreement requires a default cumulative daily limit of two hours for teen users across Meta’s social media platforms during the first phase. It also establishes nighttime access restrictions, with a later phase requiring default blocking from midnight to 6 a.m. local time.
The agreement also requires Meta to use age-assurance measures intended to identify and remove children younger than 13 from its platforms. Within three years of the settlement’s effective date, Meta must use its U13 Age Model to evaluate accounts and meet enforcement targets, with an independent auditor reporting on compliance.
Other changes include additional parental supervision tools, restrictions on potentially harmful content and controls over algorithmically influenced feeds. The Meta settlement also restricts certain appearance-related filters and addresses notifications and use during school hours, generally defined as 8 a.m. to 3 p.m. on weekdays between Aug. 15 and June 15.
Meta must pay $75 million in state costs, with the first installment due within 30 days of court approval. It will then make guaranteed payments to individual states in 10 annual installments over eight years, with additional contingent payments possible if specified conditions are met.
The settlement requires the states to release certain covered claims against Meta but states that the agreement does not constitute a final adjudication of factual or legal issues.
The broader multidistrict litigation includes claims from personal injury plaintiffs, Native American tribes and more than 1,200 school districts, which are not necessarily resolved by the state settlement.
What do you think about this Meta settlement? Let us know in the comments.
The states are represented by their respective attorneys general and by Megan O’Neill, David Patrick Beglin, Katherine Read and Nayha Arora of the California Department of Justice, Jason Slothouber and Shannon Stevenson of the Colorado Department of Law, John Christian Lewis of the Kentucky Office of the Attorney General’s Office of Consumer Protection and Mandy K. Wang of the New Jersey Office of the Attorney General.
The Meta lawsuit is People of the State of California, et al. v. Meta Platforms Inc., Case No. 4:23-cv-05448 (MDL No. 3047), in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
Don’t Miss Out!
Check out our list of Class Action Lawsuits and Class Action Settlements you may qualify to join!
Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:
- Class action claims Bloom sparkling energy drinks contain artificial flavor
- Publix frozen berries recall expands over E. coli outbreak linked to 12 illnesses
- Madewell hit with class action over alleged fake sales, inflated reference prices
- Goodyear, Pizza Hut, 7-Eleven, Campbell’s face wage and hour lawsuits
