The Story is this;
About my Small Claims Lawsuit.(The following cannot be used as "legal advice". Please contact an attorney, or research it yourself, to answer your own questions, that is what I did, and it was easy)
It all started about two years go. I had been a Facebook member previously, had cancelled my account many years previously. About July of 2016, I decided to see if I could create a business venture utilizing Facebook's marketing programs. It was a "wall art" product, but soon realized that it would not work. Pricing of the product was the problem.
It was not Facebook's fault, as I did then, and still consider Facebook to be a valuable marketing tool, as well as great social tool for about everyone that are members. It is a valuable tool for positive and negative ventures. It was the negative side of the Facebook that caught my attention.
I remember placing in the "search" box, for the search term of Real Estate Indio California, and within days, just about everyplace I went on the Internet, there was an ad for Homes in Indio. It was comical at first, but it became irritating real fast. I even try, just for a test, placing the Facebook "key words" for other products and services, and yes, it became apparent to me that I was on lists outside of the Facebook Web Site.
But, it was not a major issue for me, and I did not use Facebook for the original intent, and so I wanted to have some fun and accessed the "political forums" of the Presidential race that started for me, in August of 2016. It was a major forum of activity, pro and con for the candidates. And the great thing about that episode was the ability to insert "photographs" to help your argument. To make a long story short, someone that did not like my posts and photographs, entered my computer and deleted all the photographs. That was a shock. Owning computers since 1983, and on the Internet since about 1992, fulltime, that had never occurred.
So, I simply stopped using Facebook and deleted the program from the computer, but did not delete the membership, for I intended to further investigate how they could enter my secured computer without knowing how they did it. That was about September 2016.
I put the Facebook behind me, and just did not think of it, until the following summer of 2017, when I noticed information pertaining to Quantum Analytica, with the issue being the following; "Facebook operates a social networking website that allows people to communicate with their family, friends, and coworkers. Facebook develops technologies that facilitate the sharing of information, photographs, website links, and videos. Facebook users have the ability to share and restrict information based on their own specific criteria. By the end of 2016, Facebook had more than 2.2 billion active users. The company's mission is to give people the power to build community and bring the world closer together. People use Facebook to stay connected with friends and family, to discover what's going on in the world, and to share and express what matters to them.
Cambridge Analytica is a privately held company that combines data mining and data analysis with strategic communication for use in the electoral process. As part of the sign up process and while interacting with the network, Facebook users create profiles containing significant amounts of personal information, including their name, birthdate, hometown, address, location, interests, relationships, email address, photos, and videos, amongst others, referred to herein as Personal Information.
This problem involves the absolute disregard with which Facebook had chosen to treat the member's Personal Information. While this information was supposed to be protected, and used for only expressly disclosed and limited purposes, without authorization, or by exceeding whatever limited authorization it, or its agents, had, improperly collected the Personal Information of nearly 50 million Facebook users. Facebook, for its part, knew this improper data aggregation was occurring and failed to stop it, or actively avoided discovering such knowledge in order to profess supposed ignorance."
That was simply one of many articles pertaining to the Quantum Analytica, there have been many, detailing the agreement between Facebook and Quantum Analytica and what occurred. I have included the complete chain of events in my evidence of this Small Claims Court case.
So, my Intellectual Curiosity was activated. This was about the month of January of 2018. The question was, to myself.....What right did Facebook have to use all of my private information that they were able to acquire, whether by them or their "associates"? My answer was none. They did not have a right to sell or give my private information to anyone, outside their organization, without my expressed approval. Their terms of service did not give them the right to sell or give away for free or profit, my private information.
So the following is my premise for my legal actions against Facebook;
“A home owner decides to replace a lock on his front door. He contacts a local lock smith to replace the lock in the front door.
After agreeing on a price of $200.00, the Lock Smith replaces the lock on the front door. The Lock Smith gives the homeowner, keys to the lock in the front door.
After a period of time, the Home Owner that purchased the lock of the front door from that Lock Smith discovers through his news media outlet, that the same Lock Smith that replaced his lock, in his front door, has been accused and it is certified, that he has given, sold, exchanged for value, copied keys of his customers homes to other people, for their own use and profit, whether legal or illegal.
So, the home owner calls another Lock Smith Company, to order a new lock for his front door, and after arriving at an agreed price of $200.00, the lock of the front door is replaced. The new Lock Smith signs an agreement that he will not give or sell a copy of his keys to the lock in the front door, to anyone.
The Home Owner decides to sue the Lock Smith that sold, traded, exchanged for value, gave away home owner lock keys. The small claims lawsuit was for the cost of the new lock for his front door, court and legal costs, and, the worry, time and stress of having to worry about the safety of his home and having to purchase a new lock for his front door.
And…..The Home Owner of the new lock in his front door was never burglarized”.
The Small Claims Lawsuit of Alfred R.
Jordan versus Facebook. A
demand letter to Facebook has been sent for a
Total of $10,000.00.
The Key legal issue, is the following statement by Facebook in their Terms of Service, (TOS). They have established the following statement....”We do not give your content or information to advertisers without your consent.”
That is the key point of my lawsuit against Facebook. For they have allowed the following to be a reality;
Facebook engaged in unfair and deceptive conduct by making representations to consumers that were knowingly false. Specifically, Facebook represented to its users that their personal data would be protected in accordance with its user and developer agreements. The extracted data included names, phone numbers, email subjects and email addresses, political and religious affiliations, and other personal interests, and now, with their new Terms of Service (TOS), all credit card information.
Despite these material representations, Facebook permitted third parties, including Cambridge Analytica for one example, to collect and harvest its users’ personal data, including such sensitive information as their private messages, for purposes of profiling and targeting them with tailored messaging that would dependably influence and manipulate their behavior.
For that example of one episode recorded worldwide, Facebook had actual knowledge that Cambridge Analytica gained unauthorized access to its users’ personal data without their knowledge or consent and in express violation of its user and developer agreements; yet did not put a stop to it.
The consequences of these false misrepresentations were further compounded by Facebook’s decision, upon learning that Cambridge Analytica had misappropriated user data for political purposes, to conceal the breach from its users and do nothing more than quietly (and unsuccessfully) ask Cambridge Analytica to delete the data.
By concealing this misconduct from its users, Facebook avoided backlash over its blatant misrepresentations from its users and preserved the strength of its data mining operation by avoiding a situation where its users reacted by deactivating their accounts.
The Cambridge Analytica episode is only one small example. Facebook “lives” for one purpose, to gather as much personal, private information on individuals as can be created, with the help of thousands of companies that are in the business of gathering personal information for profit.
The process is simple, they either fund to get the excess information with these third parties, or they purchase the information from these third parties. And the other option is for them to exchange information, with these third parties, depending how important that “third party company” information is.
Then, they assembled the information on each individual, with full knowledge of their likes and dislikes pertaining to “products” and “services” from their Internet searches and comments, and place advertisements before their eyes. That is how Facebook produces a very large section of their yearly income. By simply placing advertisements before the eyes of the individuals and charging their customers so many dollars for so many displays of their product or service on Facebook.
And in order to accomplish this feat, they must have all the private information they can gather to be successful, as they are. Even if their customer is abused.
They are also guilty of bypassing the State of California Law pertaining to privacy;
* CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION ‑ARTICLE I DECLARATION OF RIGHTS [SECTION 1 ‑ SEC. 32] ( Article 1 adopted 1879. )
SECTION 1. All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.
(Sec. 1 added Nov. 5, 1974, by Proposition 7. Resolution Chapter 90, 1974.)
Also, Facebook’s terms of service clearly spell out the expectations for users. Users know, if they actually read the agreement, how they are permitted to behave on the platform, and how ownership of their content works, and what the consequences are if they violate the policy.
However, Facebook has no way of confirming the capacity of its users to agree to the contract. Nor can they show that certain members were not used for their "marketing programs" to the third partners they were associated with.
It is also not entirely clear how Facebook will behave in the contract and how it will be held accountable for misbehavior. That is with one exception: its promise to "require applications to respect your privacy." Facebook did very little to enforce its contracts, particularly with developers. In neglecting to do so, it violated its own user agreement.
So now, the lawsuit has been filed, the Facebook Company served, and will meet them in Court. The evidence against Facebook is over whelming.
SO, WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO?
I intend to raise Twenty Thousand Dollars ($20,000.00) to donate, to individuals, that cannot afford to sue, but yet can follow the procedures and attend the court hearing. The hundred (100) to Two Hundred (200) approximately, individuals will be from nearby, as the court case must be Adjudicated in San Mateo County, California, or which will in-turn show any individual how to form their own group and help Facebook face the truth, and pay for it.
The complete notebook
of my information against Facebook is available to anyone. Simply contact
After the activation of this GO FUND ME program, I will start contacting all my friends that are on FACEBOOK. And ask them to contact all their friends that are using FACEBOOK as well, and visit the GO FUND ME web site, to donate as much as they easily can.
For any person that donates a hundred dollars ($100.00) or more, they would be eligible to be helped with the additional funds to file their Lawsuit. I would simply take their name and contact them, and arrange the sequence of events.
There is no profit in this venture for me. I only want to help destroy an Internet Oligarch that is using private information without the formal approval of the member. Using private information means; Sharing or selling the information to "parties" outside the FACEBOOK Inc., Company.
A Web Site has been established to provide information to anyone, especially for people outside the Coachella Valley area of California. The web site is; www.lawsuitagainstcrooks.com
If any person wants to create their own lawsuit in their own area, they can purchase, at my cost, the information, and use it freely. Maybe start their own GO FUND ME program.
Why not have 100,000 members file suit and win $10,000.00 each, in a judgement, that will also give all Internet predators warning; You don't steal private information, or use a person's private information without the written approval of the person owning the private information, when used outside of the membership of the web site.
Copyright 2018. Lawsuit Against Crooks, a Division of Nabor One Company. All Rights Reserved.