Maybe, but in the official verdict they didn't take into account all affected children either; they only used an estimated 37,500 affected teen users to calculate the fine.
Meta was fined for:
- 37,500 instances of deceptive-practice violations @ $5,000 per
- 37,500 instances of unconscionable-practice violations @ $5,000 per
- 75,000 total violations x $5,000 = $375 million
The rationale for only using 37,500 users (instead of the actual user count), and choosing $5,000 per instance (the maximum amount allowed by law) is unclear to me.
The second case is even more confusing, New Mexico requested $953 million from Meta to pay for its "equitable share" of a $3.7 billion public-nuisance abatement program state experts created. A judge reduced this amount to only $567 million, determining that:
1) other platforms also share responsibility, and
2) some proposed expenses were too broad (ex: the judge denied the request for the construction of entire new hospitals and clinics as part of the program).
Meta was fined for:
- 37,500 instances of deceptive-practice violations @ $5,000 per
- 37,500 instances of unconscionable-practice violations @ $5,000 per
- 75,000 total violations x $5,000 = $375 million
The rationale for only using 37,500 users (instead of the actual user count), and choosing $5,000 per instance (the maximum amount allowed by law) is unclear to me.
The second case is even more confusing, New Mexico requested $953 million from Meta to pay for its "equitable share" of a $3.7 billion public-nuisance abatement program state experts created. A judge reduced this amount to only $567 million, determining that:
1) other platforms also share responsibility, and
2) some proposed expenses were too broad (ex: the judge denied the request for the construction of entire new hospitals and clinics as part of the program).