Category Archives: Facebook

Facebook Users in US could get up to $5,000 for AI photo scanning breaching Privacy

In the public interest.

This could open the way for citizen class actions on any organisation that uses facial recognition or other privacy breaching technology.

US Facebook users could get up to $5,000 compensation for EVERY picture tagged by the company’s photo-scanning AI as judge rules the app stole biometric data

  • A US federal judge has found that Facebook AI breached user privacy 
  • Automatically generating tags in pictures broke biometric law in Illinois 
  • Affected users could be entitled to between $1,000 to $5,000 per tagged photo
  • Facebook could be set to pay out billions of dollars in compensation  

Facebook will face a class action law suit in the wake of its privacy scandal, a US federal judge has ruled.

Allegations of privacy violations emerged when it was revealed the app used a photo-scanning tool on users’ images without their explicit consent.

The facial recognition tool, launched in 2010, suggests names for people it identifies in photos uploaded by users.

Under Illinois state law, the company could be fined $1,000 to $5,000 (£700 – £3,500) each time a person’s image was used without consent.

The technology was suspended for users in Europe in 2012 over privacy fears but is still live in the US and other regions worldwide.  

Scroll down for video 

Facebook's facial recognition tool, launched in 2010, suggests names for people it identifies in photos uploaded by users. A judge has ruled this broke Illinois state law and people could be entitled to up to $5,000 (£3,500) in compensation for every image used 

Facebook’s facial recognition tool, launched in 2010, suggests names for people it identifies in photos uploaded by users. A judge has ruled this broke Illinois state law and people could be entitled to up to $5,000 (£3,500) in compensation for every image used 

It is believed that the function runs afoul of Illinois state law on protecting biometric privacy. 

Judge James Donato ruled the claims by Illinois residents Nimesh Patel, Adam Pezen, and Carlo Licata were ‘sufficiently cohesive to allow for a fair and efficient resolution on a class basis.

‘Consequently, the case will proceed with a class consisting of Facebook users located in Illinois for whom Facebook created and stored a face template after June 7, 2011,’ he said, according to the ruling. 

June 2011 was the date on which Facebook rolled out its ‘tag suggestions’ feature. 

The feature is not available to users in most countries, including the UK – and can be turned off in settings for US users. 

Facebook believe that the lawsuit should be pursued by individual as the total amount of damages could ‘amount to billions of dollars,’ U.S. District Judge James Donato wrote in the ruling.

The judge has ruled that the Illinois law is clear: Facebook has collected a ‘wealth of data on its users, including self-reported residency and IP addresses,’ reports Bloomberg.  

Facebook has acknowledged that it can identify which users who live in Illinois have face templates, he wrote.

A face template can be generated from ten or more photos and is used to generate a profile on Facebook’s database.

‘Although many individuals may not have had enough tagged photos to generate a face template in Facebook’s database, in January 2011 [when Facebook implemented tag suggestions for all users] the average user was tagged in 53 photos, far more than the 10 needed to generate a face template,’ according to a December court filing. 

Facebook believe that the lawsuit should be pursued by individual as the total amount of damages could 'amount to billions of dollars,' U.S. District Judge James Donato wrote in the ruling

Facebook believe that the lawsuit should be pursued by individual as the total amount of damages could ‘amount to billions of dollars,’ U.S. District Judge James Donato wrote in the ruling

A Facebook spokeswoman said the company was reviewing the decision, adding: ‘We continue to believe the case has no merit and will defend ourselves vigorously.’

Facebook also contends it has been very open about the tool since its inception.

The Mark Zuckerberg-owned app allows users to turn the feature off and prevent themselves from being suggested in photo tags.

Also on Monday, Facebook confirmed that it collected information from people beyond their social media use.  

‘When you visit a site or app that uses our services, we receive information even if you’re logged out or don’t have a Facebook account,’ product management director David Baser said in a post on the social network’s blog.


News that Trump-affiliated company Cambridge Analytica used data mined from Facebook user’s to try and influence the US presidential election may trigger a wave of lawsuits, according to experts. 

Vanessa Barnett, a commercial lawyer and data protection expert at Keystone Law, believes it’s ‘very likely’ we will see a slew of legal cases against the firms in the wake of the scandal.

Speaking to MailOnline, she said: ‘In the UK, users can take direct action for damages caused to them by a data breach – and that includes damages for distress. 

‘How that translates into a “pounds, shillings, pence” type number for each person would depend on the nature of the damage.’ 

‘We have case law where the Home Office revealed personal data of asylum seekers, including potentially where they lived. Some of those individuals were awarded £12,500 ($14,000) in damages.

‘It remains to be seen if the damage caused by the Cambridge Analytica scandal is comparable.’

Ms Barnett says that a number of consumer rights focused groups are looking at the possibility of a class action lawsuit, a more regular feature of the US legal system than in the UK.

A class action lawsuit filed against the firm in America is now seeking compensation for the roughly 70 million US users who were affected.

Ms Barnett added: ‘Years ago we just had Max Schrems vs Facebook, and he didn’t do too bad, but now it’s much more in the public consciousness. 

‘If the mechanics to participate in a class action are easy, I can see many users joining in.’ 


Mr Baser said ‘many’ websites and apps use Facebook services to target content and ads, including via the social network’s Like and Share buttons.

When people use their Facebook account to log into another website or app and Facebook ads and measurement tools.

But he stressed the practice was widespread, with companies such as Google and Twitter also doing the same.

The company has used a program it calls DeepFace to match other photos of a person.

 Google faces a lawsuit in Chicago like the one against Facebook in San Francisco federal court. 

The ruling comes as the social network is snared in a scandal over the mishandling of 87 million users’ data ahead of the 2016 US presidential election.beyond their social network use. 

Cambridge Analytica, run by former White House senior adviser Steve Bannon and billionaire campaign benefactor Robert Mercer, was hired by the Trump campaign during the 2016 president election. 

The social network was forced to post a warning message to users who  had their private data harvested by political data company Cambridge Analytica

Messenger communications may be among the data harvested by Cambridge Analytica, a disclosure buried in a new ‘Protecting Your Information’ (pictured) tool on the social network has revealed

It is believed that the data taken from people via the app was used to assist in the propaganda and electing of Donald Trump to president of the US.  

Mark Zuckerberg, founder and CEO of Facebook, admitted that his own information was taken in the scandal. 

The admission came in front of US congress as he was quizzed about his role in the pilfering of information from his social media site.

Recently, the social media conglomerate has implemented a variety of updated privacy controls and settings. 

Last week, Facebook launched a new tool that lets you check whether your data was harvested by Cambridge Analytica. 

Facebook slipped the previously unknown information into the fine print (highlighted in red) of the app created to address concerns over the scandal. MailOnline reporter Joe Pinkstone is among those to have had personal information shared with Cambridge Analytica 

Facebook slipped the previously unknown information into the fine print (highlighted in red) of the app created to address concerns over the scandal. MailOnline reporter Joe Pinkstone is among those to have had personal information shared with Cambridge Analytica 

As a result, Facebook’s 2.2 billion users began to receive a notification on their newsfeed.

Titled ‘Protecting Your Information,’ it contains a link to let you see what apps you use and what information you have shared with them.

A separate tool lets you manually check whether you or your friends logged into the ‘This Is Your Digital Life’ quiz responsible for the data grab.  

As well as the information provided on a person’s Facebook profile, there were concerns that personal messages were also jeopardised. 

Cambridge Analytica has denied the claims that it accessed private message data. 


Facebook users could get up to $5,000 compensation for EVERY picture used without their consent


  View all

The comments below have not been moderated.

How much of that will poor Zuckerberg get?

Click to rate

The people may see 2 or 3 dollars of that, lawyers will get the rest.

Click to rate

And the lawyers will charge you the 2-3 dollers to post you a blank cheque.

Click to rate

be sure to dump your facebook stock now, while it’s still worth something.

Click to rate

Man, I wish I had a Facebook, now. Oh, wait. No I dont…

Click to rate

I’ll sure be enjoying my $.17 cents

Click to rate

Facebook? Don’t you mean Lifelog (DARPA)? Oh yeah – you aren’t supposed to know about that. Just a wiki away….

Click to rate

Do not get your hopes up. The political power is owned by facebook.

Click to rate

wait… let me re-open my facebook account so that I can get in on the action. I had thousands of pics on Facebook back in the day!!!

Click to rate

My God Zuckerberg looks just like a little Troll in that picture.

Click to rate

That’s because he is!!

Click to rate

Class action lawsuit, each user will get st most $5.00.

Surveillance, Facebook, Privacy and Facial Recognition


I will post what Facebook has stated regarding Facial Recognition.  I have turned on all privacy and off all breaches to it.  

I would like to make clear I do not consent to facial recognition.  I had someone say to me a few days ago, if you haven’t done anything nothing to worry about.  Interestingly, another friend said that apparently Nazi propaganda made the same statement.  It is a way of manipulating consent.  

I would be considered a Person of Interest as I have spoken up in truth about issues that I think are in the public interest.  I have already had Facial Recognition photos taken by the Federal Police when I walked to Parliament to make homelessness visible.  I was well aware that the police could have taken a photo of the 4 of us.  Instead the rounded the corner (I was last in the group) and I know they were targeting me.

This was confirmed in Canberra when I entered a plaza after sending a letter to the Assistant Minister for Homelessness. I was the only person there.  I noticed that a bright light came on and I knew I was being filmed. I knew it was facial recognition. I moved closer to the device and it had police insignia. 

Another incident was my driving to Parliament in the back entrance at my mother’s behest.  She indicated that ASIO (Australian Security Intelligence Organisation) had a building attached to Parliament.  We all agreed that was concerning as it implies surveillance and monitoring of the people’s house.  I drove the car with my step father.  I noticed a police man with dark glasses (no smile) as we drove around the perimeter. I was curious.  I then went to the Senate Inquiry on the 4th of July (US Independence Day) interestingly the day I announced my independence and finalised my last blog.

Now I haven’t committed any crime only reporting in my blogs information that I believe is in the public interest. I am working in the pubic interest as a peacemaker as I have concerns about concealment of information that is in the public interest.  

I am concerned when journalists are raided by police, information collected and SAS soldier lawyer investigating humanitarian law given killings in Afghanistan became the subject of investigation. The essence is the criminalisation of murder of civilians in war zones. This is in the public interest.

I had two files on my USB cyber attacked (the rest fine). I am unable to access these files, one was to the ABC. 

So I am monitoring my government to ensure they are representing the people and not other parties or covering up misconduct.

This is brief information about the Australian Inquiry into press freedom. 

On 4 July 2019, the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security commenced an inquiry into the impact of the exercise of law enforcement and intelligence powers on the freedom of the press. The inquiry was referred by the Attorney-General, The Hon Christian Porter MP who noted that the Government will consider proposals from media organisations and interested bodies which aim to ensure the right balance is struck between a free press and keeping Australians safe.

For further information about the inquiry see the full terms of reference.

As notified in the media release of 13 December 2019, due to the tendering of late submissions requiring further deliberations by the Committee, the inquiry will not report until early in 2020. 

Please note that the Senate Environment and Communications References Committee is currently conducting an inquiry that touches on some similar issues to this inquiry, including the freedom of the press, disclosure of information and law enforcement frameworks. Details about this separate inquiry and its terms of reference can be found here.


Therefore, facial recognition and profiling is part of this as family and friends become identified under the guise of seeking to ID the right user logging into the right account. I realised a year ago to my shock that it was about profiling and finding out who you know, a vastly different reason. 

The issue of the CIA involvement in Facebook and social media, albeit a foreign intelligence agency accessing global profiles is of great concern as they are not protecting the public interest of Australians. They may be targeting people who dissent in the name of freedom of speech.  This is the real concern here. Edward Snowden became a whistle blower warning the global public of mass surveillance of citizens not criminals.  This modus operandi of turning innocent people into the ‘enemy’ due to the focus on maintaining power as control not ensuring peace and security as good global citizenship, is the dividing line.

CIA involved with Facebook and other data gathers refer link: CBS report

The use of cyber tracking (stalking), Artificial Intelligence (predictive), unauthorised programs dropped on computers, Windows updating without internet, drones (aerial surveillance normalised as it is sold to the public), illegal access of emails given Defence capabilities (staff recruited) in industry, data gathering (algorithm programs and human intel), profiling (via human filters and unquestioned attitudes of who is ‘with us or against us’ perspectives – targeting) and a whole raft of issues concerning privacy. Yet this has been given the green light by Communications authorities as there is no real regulation as it profits IT industries.  It reflects the disempowerment of legitimate public oversight.  

When I was travelling through Central and South America, I by-passed Columbia as I was concerned it was dangerous, so I flew transiting through Miami in the US.  To my surprise I was forced to enter the country to be iris printed and finger printed like a criminal (electronically) I had no rights nor was I informed. My own government provided no warning to its citizens. I was concerned as I am aware of criminality at the highest levels and I no longer feel confident I am dealing with national security (especially when forced to enter a country), it appears to be control and profiling, starkly different rationales.  In a country that has a Bill of Rights, as an international I had no rights and this is the my underlying concern as I can be vulnerable given my peace background in the public interest.  

We are in a Brave New World which is not brave but afraid. Control always masks deep fear and insecurity.

There are real reasons why privacy is important as it enables people the freedom to live in a free society without undue scrutiny.  Every person needs privacy for wellbeing, we do not want to live under a Russian system.  The cyber scrutiny, location tracking and profiling is not unlike a person tracking your movements as they are obsessed. Or a person going through your files (scanning USB) or staring through the Window (through camera). It can cause trauma, mental health issues or evoke suicide, it is very serious for the public.  

It is the opposite of democracy and freedom.

So to Facebook assurances noting they are not an Australian company under Australian law.


Please Review the Face Recognition Setting

Your face recognition setting is off. We want to let you know what face recognition is and how we use it, and then you can decide whether to turn it on or keep it off.

How We Use Face Recognition

If you turn this setting on, we’ll create your face recognition template and use it in the following types of ways:

  • Find photos and video you’re in so we can help you review or share content, suggest tags, and provide more relevant content and feature recommendations.
  • Help protect you and others from impersonation and identity misuse, and improve platform reliability.
  • Provide accessibility features by telling people with visual impairments who’s in a photo or video.

What We Collect

Face recognition is a technology that analyzes photos and videos you’re in to calculate a unique number, called a “template.” When your face recognition setting is on, we create and use your template to compare it to analyses of other photos or video to recognize if you appear in that content.

We don’t share your template with anyone. We’ll keep your template while your account is active but will delete it if you turn your face recognition setting off.

I don’t feel assured.

Do you want to turn on the face recognition setting?

To understand how we use face recognition, please see the previous page. These examples help explain how your experience changes if you turn the setting on or keep it off. You can always manage this later in Settings.When this setting is on:

  • We can notify you about photos you’re in but haven’t been tagged in.
  • We can help protect against someone using your photo to impersonate you.
  • We can tell people with visual impairments when you’re in a photo or video through a screen reader.

When this setting is off:

  • We’ll still notify you when someone tags you in a photo.
  • We won’t be able to use face recognition to help stop someone from impersonating you, but we’ll continue to work to protect your account in other ways.
  • People with visual impairments will be told you’re in a photo only if you’re tagged.

The reality is a intelligence capability could hack in and impersonate and alter information. That is where cyber is concerning. You could swear blind that you didn’t write that blog but the evidence is in writing.

When a person who is apparently sight impaired will be told who I am. I don’t consent to that.

The tab saying to Keep off and Turn on are different. The later is bright blue the other appears deactivated. It uses psychology to influence ‘yes’. This is not democracy.

Final comments from Facebook.

Thanks for reviewing this information. You can learn more about your choices and manage your data settings any time in Privacy Shortcuts.

Privacy Settings and Tools