this post was submitted on 01 Dec 2023
56 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37720 readers
319 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
alyaza@beehaw.org
TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org
gyrfalcon@beehaw.org
rs5th@beehaw.org
coldredlight@beehaw.org
Los@beehaw.org
SemioticStandard@beehaw.org
TheRtRevKaiser@kbin.social
remington@beehaw.org
56
Facebook parent Meta sues the FTC claiming 'unconstitutional authority' in child privacy case (apnews.com)
submitted 11 months ago by alyaza@beehaw.org to c/technology@beehaw.org
9 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

MENLO PARK, Calif. (AP) — The parent company of Instagram and Facebook has sued the Federal Trade Commission in an attempt to stop the agency from reopening a 2020 privacy settlement with the company that would prohibit it from profiting from data it collects on users under 18.

In a lawsuit filed late Wednesday in federal court in Washington, D.C., Meta Platforms Inc. said it is challenging “the structurally unconstitutional authority exercised by the FTC” in reopening the privacy agreement.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] conciselyverbose@kbin.social 25 points 11 months ago (1 children)

If they didn't have the authority, why did you settle with them?

Noticing you failed to abide by the settlement you agreed to isn't new authority.

[–] pixelpop3@beehaw.org 4 points 11 months ago

The Supreme Court is currently working on cases that are about overturning precident that allows administrative agencies to make policy that strays from the letter of the law. So my guess is Meta lawyers see a chance to say "there is no federal law that prohibits making profit off children, so this administrative rule is unconstitutional". Something like that (I am not a lawyer).