Affected people can expect compensation after data theft on Facebook. In a preliminary assessment, the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) made it clear that losing control over one’s own data can also give rise to a claim for damages. The Federal Court does not want to rule until later. This is important for a number of other proceedings in German courts (ref. VI ZR 10/24).
Advertisement
At a hearing on Monday afternoon, presiding judge Stephen Seiters said that even losing control over one’s own data could be enough to be able to assert claims. Such harm must be proven, but not, for example, from related fear or anxiety. The Senate therefore assesses the case differently than the Cologne Higher Regional Court, which dismissed the case.
Scraping Profile Data
In April 2021, unknown people took advantage of the friend search function on the social network and automatically gained access to profile data (“scraping”). They were able to steal data from approximately 533 million users from 106 countries, which they distributed publicly on the Internet. As a result, claims for damages filed by users against Facebook have so far been largely unsuccessful in court.
Also playing into the proceedings is whether Facebook’s default setting for the contact import function violates the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Plaintiffs had criticized that security measures were too lax. They also want compensation for the so-called immaterial damages they have suffered and the loss of control over the data.
Facebook’s parent company Meta rejects such claims because there has been neither a violation of the General Data Protection Regulation nor the plaintiffs have suffered any direct harm from the incident. A spokesperson for Meta had described the lawsuits as baseless before the proceedings: “More than 6,000 lawsuits have now been dismissed by German courts on the grounds that the plaintiffs have no valid claims for liability or damages.” The company also mentions technical measures that aim to prevent so-called “scraping” of user data.
Key decisions with consequences
The BGH has designated the case as a pioneering decision. This option is available to the court from October 31 Guiding Decision Act Has been implemented. In cases that involve fundamental legal questions, a major decision of the Federal Court should serve as a guideline for lower courts in similar cases. The Federal Court also rules in an important adjudication process if plaintiffs withdraw their appeal applications for strategic reasons.
According to the Federal Bar Association, thousands of lawsuits on this topic are pending in German regional and higher regional courts. The Federal Court has also submitted several appeals to the decision. Lower courts have so far answered the legal questions very differently and have interpreted the underlying case law of the Court of Justice of the European Court (ECJ) differently.
Facebook recommends checking the settings in “Privacy Checkup.” In the “How people can find and contact you” section in Settings, users can specify who can find them based on their email address and phone number. Additionally, they can also edit who can see basic information in the profile, among other things. Additionally, Facebook mentions measures that are aimed at helping against scraping. A team of data and analytics experts and developers, among others, are on hand to detect and block unauthorized readings. Data limits are intended to prevent someone from obtaining more data than is necessary for normal use of the Products.
(vbr)
