Meta Illegally Collected Flo Users’ Menstrual Data, Jury Rules

Yet different logic to beryllium wary of play search apps.

A California assemblage has recovered that Meta illegally collected personification wellness information from nan Flo period-tracking app, violating nan state’s wiretap law. The verdict concludes a lawsuit revenge against Flo, Google, Meta, and app analytics institution Flurry successful 2021, successful which Flo app users accused nan companies of collecting their backstage menstrual wellness information without consent for targeted advertising. 

While Flo promised to support users’ delicate reproductive wellness accusation private, nan suit alleged that Flo allowed Google and Meta to eavesdrop connected in-app communications betwixt November 2016 and February 2019, violating California’s Invasion of Privacy Act. The cases against Flo, Google, and Flurry were resolved done undisclosed settlements earlier nan trial, leaving Meta arsenic nan only remaining defendant. 

The assemblage reached a verdict connected Monday that location was a “preponderance” of grounds showing Meta had “intentionally eavesdropped connected and/or recorded conversations utilizing an physics device,” unbeknownst to Flo app users. While financial damages person yet to beryllium decided, each usurpation of nan California Invasion of Privacy Act tin consequence successful a punishment of $5,000, pinch nan suit revenge connected behalf of “millions” of Flo users.

“This verdict sends a clear connection astir nan protection of integer wellness information and nan responsibilities of Big Tech,” lead proceedings attorneys Michael P. Canty and Carol C. Villegas said successful a statement. “Companies for illustration Meta that covertly profit from users’ astir friendly accusation must beryllium held accountable.”

Meta has objected to nan verdict and will apt entreaty nan decision.

“We vigorously disagree pinch this result and are exploring each ineligible options,” Meta said successful a statement reported by TechCrunch. “The plaintiffs’ claims against Meta are simply false. User privateness is important to Meta, which is why we do not want wellness aliases different delicate information, and why our position prohibit developers from sending any.”