Landmark trial on Meta’s impact on children’s mental health begins in US - International

Meta Platforms is facing a lawsuit from 29 US states over allegations that Facebook and Instagram were designed to maximize youth engagement without adequate safety protections. The trial, which could last seven weeks, seeks damages up to $1.4 trillion and platform design changes. Meta denies the claims, citing investments in youth safety. The case may impact how tech companies design products and collect minor data.

Meta (META) is facing a trial in the U.S. by four states, accused of designing Facebook and Instagram algorithms to addict children and violate their privacy. The prosecutors seek a $1.5T fine, though the judge called this 'unreasonable.' Meta denies the claims, citing existing protective measures. If found guilty, Meta may need to overhaul its apps' software code, impacting its business model.

A federal trial began against Meta, with New York AG Letitia James and 32 other AGs alleging the company's platforms harmed young users. The lawsuit claims Meta designed addictive features and violated child privacy laws. Meta denies the allegations and is defending itself in court. The trial, expected to last 6-8 weeks, could impact how major platforms address child safety.

Meta Platforms (META) faces a lawsuit from 29 U.S. states over claims of creating addictive products for children, with potential penalties up to hundreds of billions. Disney (DIS) sued the FCC, alleging political motives in license reviews. Klarna (KLAR) stock fell 22.81% due to weak guidance, citing lower volumes in Germany and currency impacts.

Meta spends hundreds of millions annually on Microsoft's Azure for AI processing, per Bloomberg. Meta uses Azure to benchmark its own AI models, but may shift to in-house solutions. Microsoft's AI revenue is concentrated among a few large tech clients, including OpenAI and ByteDance.

A federal judge denied Google, Meta, and TikTok's request to block California's SB 976 law during their appeal. Judge Edward Davila ruled they did not prove irreparable harm from complying with the law's personalized feed provisions. The companies are appealing a lower court's decision that upheld the law's constitutionality.