The 4 US lawsuits that could change the way social networks operate

Social media is under intense legal scrutiny
Getty images via BBC
When social media began to dominate the internet 20 years ago, it was widely hailed as a revolutionary technology that would connect people from different backgrounds and make information more accessible.
Today, companies like Meta, owner of Facebook and Instagram, Google, owner of YouTube, and Snapchat, along with relatively newer networks like TikTok, Discord and social gaming platform Roblox, face thousands of lawsuits in the US on the grounds that they are instead harming their users, particularly children.
Taken together, the outcome of the lawsuits, whether through out-of-court settlements or jury verdicts against the companies, could forever change the way social platforms operate. Lawsuits against the platforms are influencing broader public perception and will likely affect political elections for years to come, impacting new and revised laws and regulations. Many of the cases are working their way through courts in California, where the major social media platforms are headquartered. Known as the "California effect", legal and policy changes implemented in the state tend to lead to changes across the country.
"There is no longer any way to deny that there is a problem with child safety on platforms," said Alexis Shore Ingber, an expert in communications law and professor at Syracuse University. "We are seeing a tipping point. These cases are significant."
This year, Meta and YouTube suffered an unprecedented defeat in a case brought by a young woman who claimed she was addicted to social media as a child, which contributed to her mental and emotional health problems. The companies were ordered by a jury to pay her a total of US$6 million (R$31 million) in compensation. Both law firms said they disagreed with the verdict and intended to appeal.
Meta also lost a larger case in New Mexico, brought by that state's attorney general, who accused the company of misleading the public by claiming its platforms were safe for children, despite known problems with sexual exploitation of young people on them. Meta said it also plans to appeal that decision.
During the years that these cases have been filed and resolved, Meta has rolled out changes to its platforms aimed at making them safer for young users.
But broader changes to the platforms - in how they are designed, function, and even are accessed - will likely take years and go through several unfavorable court rulings.
Between this year and next, Meta and the other major social media platforms will face more trials, in which juries will be able to consider a range of allegations from young users, their parents, school districts and state prosecutors, who allege a range of harmful effects on the way social media platforms are designed and operate.
Even a billionaire is prepared to take Meta to trial for hosting ads that scam people and steal their money.
So which cases really matter? The BBC analyzed dozens of cases in the US to find the few lawsuits against social media and social gaming companies that are on track for trial in the next year or so and that could have a significant impact on the platforms' businesses and operations.
According to Adam J. Schwartz, a lawyer who also founded an online document review tool, the following lawsuits "are the flagship cases that will set the tone and tenor for shaping the law in the future."
Schools vs. platforms
One of the lawsuits against social media companies involves more than 1,000 schools in California
Getty images via BBC
Extensive multidistrict litigation (MDL, as this type of lawsuit is known in the U.S.) in California includes allegations from more than 1,000 school districts across the country.
Broadly, schools accuse Instagram, YouTube, Snapchat, and TikTok of being intentionally designed to be addictive, which has allegedly harmed children mentally and emotionally through excessive use of the platforms.
Schools claim that dealing with the harmful effects of social media has cost them money and resources, and that the platforms should be considered a "public nuisance" and held accountable for affecting children's well-being.
Although a jury trial for some of the allegations of If school districts are set to begin in February - after the platforms recently settled with a school district that would be the first to go to trial - all of the cases could take a few more years to be fully resolved.
If court outcomes are unfavorable to the platforms, everything from how the platforms display user engagement to who they allow on the platforms could change.
A YouTube spokesperson said, "The allegations in these complaints are simply not true." A Snapchat spokeswoman said: "We fundamentally disagree with the allegations - we do not target schools."
Meta declined to comment and TikTok did not respond to a request for comment.
On Tuesday (6/23), YouTube reached a settlement with a 15-year-old in the state of Florida who had filed a similar lawsuit against the platform.
"This matter was resolved amicably, and our focus remains on developing age-appropriate products and parental controls to deliver on that promise," said Google spokesperson José Castañeda in a statement to the BBC.
People of the State of California vs. Meta
Lawyers from California and Colorado led a group of 29 states in filing a lawsuit in 2023 against Meta and Instagram. The trial is scheduled for August.
The states are accusing Meta of violations of the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), a federal law.
The law, enacted in 2000, was created to protect children under 13 from being targeted by companies operating online.
Meta has already provided more than 2 million documents linked to this case, according to court records.
States want Meta to improve its control mechanisms to prevent children under 13 from using its platforms and remove data it previously collected from underage users, in addition to a series of other changes.
Meta uses this data for practices such as ad targeting and training its models and artificial intelligence (AI) tools.
A company spokesperson declined to comment on the case.
Unidentified minor vs. Roblox and Discord
Roblox and Discord face a lawsuit related to the design and marketing of their platforms
AFP/Getty images/BBC
This lawsuit against Roblox and Discord was filed by a 13-year-old boy in state court in San Mateo, California. The boy claims he was groomed by a sexual predator through both platforms. The man involved was later arrested for his crimes against more than two dozen children.
The lawsuit argues that both platforms were flawedly designed and engaged in misleading marketing about safety to young users and therefore should be held responsible for the harm suffered by the young man whose identity was not disclosed.
Roblox, which is a gaming-focused platform with many social media features, and Discord attempted to take the case to arbitration, which is a private legal process outside the court system. The court refused, but the case is currently on hold pending the companies' appeal against that decision.
If Roblox and Discord lose their appeals, the case could go to trial later this year.
A court ruling against the platforms could bring changes to age restrictions and the ability for strangers to interact with young users through the platform's messaging and chat rooms.
A Discord spokeswoman declined to comment. A representative for Roblox did not respond to a request for comment.
Forrest v Meta
Not all cases against social media platforms that go to trial have to do with harm against children.
Andrew Forrest, an Australian billionaire, sued Meta in California in 2022 over the company's alleged failure to combat fraudulent advertisements that deceive Australians into fake investments that have allegedly proliferated on Facebook using his name and image.
With allegations that include misuse of his image and unjust enrichment - because Meta makes money from ads on its platform - regardless of the goal or outcome, Forrest's suit could be one of the most significant.
He is asking the court to rule that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act cannot be used as a defense by Meta in the case. Meta is arguing that it is protected from Forrest's claims by Section 230.
Enacted in 1996, Section 230, as it is commonly called, essentially gives platforms legal immunity from anything that occurs on them.
If the court ultimately sides with Forrest, it could overturn decades of online platforms' defenses.
A Meta spokesperson declined to comment on the case.

Source: G1