When social media began to take the internet by storm 20 years ago, it was seen as a revolutionary technology that would bring people together and make information more accessible.
Today, companies such as Meta, the owner of Facebook and Instagram, Google, the owner of YouTube and Snapchat, as well as relatively new platforms such as TikTok, Discord and Roblox, are facing thousands of lawsuits in the US because, the plaintiffs argue, they have caused harm to users, including children.
Taken together, the outcomes of these lawsuits – whether they are ultimately settled out of court or result in jury verdicts against the companies – could permanently change the way social media platforms operate.
“This is a moment that is being closely watched not only by lawyers, but also by regulators and legislators,” says Eric Telli, a lawyer and professor at Columbia University Law School.
Telli noted that the impact of this wave of social media lawsuits on broader public perception is likely to influence policy decisions over the next few years, leading to the drafting of new laws and regulations and the amendment of existing ones.
Many of the cases are being heard in California’s courts, where the headquarters of the major social media platforms are located. Known as the ‘California effect’, changes in legislation and policy adopted in the state tend to lead to changes across the country.
“It is no longer possible to deny that there is a problem with child safety on social media platforms,” says Alexis Shore Ingber, an expert in communications law and a professor at Syracuse University. “We are witnessing a turning point. These cases are decisive.”
Earlier this year, Meta and YouTube suffered an unprecedented setback in a case brought by a woman who claimed that she had been addicted to social media as a child, which contributed to her mental and emotional health problems. A jury ordered the company to pay her $6 million in compensation.
Both firms have stated that they disagree with the verdict and intend to appeal.
Meta also lost a major case in New Mexico, brought by the state’s Attorney General, who accused the company of misleading the public about the safety of its platforms for children, despite known issues regarding the sexual exploitation of young people on them.
Meta has stated that it also plans to appeal this verdict.
Over the years whilst these cases were being heard in court, Meta has made changes to its platforms aimed at making them safer for young users.
However, broader changes to social media – in terms of their design, functioning and even access – are likely to continue for many years, and we will see more court rulings against them.
In the run-up to next year, Meta and other major social media platforms are bracing for even more lawsuits, in which juries may consider a series of claims from young users, their parents, school districts and state attorneys general, who point to a range of negative consequences arising from the way social media platforms are designed and operated.
Even one billionaire is prepared to take Meta to court for running adverts that fraudulently deceive wealthy individuals.
So, which court cases really matter?
The BBC has reviewed dozens of cases in the US to identify several lawsuits against companies that own social media platforms and gaming companies, which are due to be heard over the next year or so and could have a significant impact on the platforms’ business and operations.
According to Adam J. Schwartz, a lawyer who has also developed an online document verification tool, the following court cases “are the ones that will set the tone and direction for future legislation”.
Teenage addiction to social media
Photo: Getty Images
This large-scale lawsuit in California involves claims from more than 1,000 school districts across the US
In general, the schools accuse Instagram, YouTube, Snapchat and TikTok of being deliberately designed to induce addiction, which they claim causes psychological and emotional harm to children due to excessive use of these platforms.
The schools claim that combating the negative impact of social media has cost them money and resources, and that these platforms should be regarded as a ‘public hazard’ and held accountable for their impact on children’s wellbeing.
As the platforms recently reached an out-of-court settlement with the school district whose case was due to be heard first, court proceedings in some of the school district’s other cases are now set to begin as early as February. However, it may take several more years for all the cases to be fully resolved.
A YouTube spokesperson said: “The allegations in these complaints are simply untrue.”
A spokesperson for Snapchat said: “We fundamentally disagree with these allegations – we do not target schools.”
Meta declined to comment, whilst TikTok did not respond to a request for comment.
If the court rulings do not go in the platforms’ favour, everything could change.
California residents take on Meta
Representatives from California and Colorado led a group of 29 states that filed a lawsuit against Meta and Instagram in 2023. The trial is scheduled for August this year.
Although the case is being heard by the same judge as the California schools case, the states are accusing Meta solely of breaching the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, a federal law known as COPPA. The law was designed to protect children under the age of 13 from harassment by online companies, but it was passed back in 2000.
According to court records, Meta has already produced more than 2 million documents in this case.
If the states win their claims, they will require Meta to do a better job of preventing users under the age of 13 from using its platforms and to delete the data it previously collected from underage users, as well as to make a number of other changes.
Meta uses this data for purposes such as ad targeting and training its artificial intelligence (AI) models and tools.
A company spokesperson declined to comment.
John Doe, a minor, v Roblox and others
Photo: AFP via Getty Images
This case against Roblox and Discord was filed in a state court in San Mateo, California, by a 13-year-old boy. He alleges that he was recently harassed on both platforms by an adult who was later arrested for offences against more than two dozen children.
The claim alleges that both platforms had design and marketing flaws relating to the safety of young users, and that they should therefore be held liable for the harm caused to John Doe.
Roblox, a gaming-focused platform with many social media features, and Discord attempted to refer the case to arbitration, which is a private legal process outside the court system. The court refused, but the case is currently on hold until the companies lodge an appeal against this decision.
If Roblox and Discord lose their appeal, the case could go to court later this year. A court ruling against the platforms could change age restrictions and the ability of strangers to interact with young users via the platforms’ messaging and chat features.
A spokesperson for Discord declined to comment. A spokesperson for Roblox did not respond to a request for comment.
Forrest v Meta
Photo by Brandon Thorne/Bloomberg via Getty Images
Not all cases against social media platforms currently before the courts relate to harm caused to children.
Dr Andrew Forrest, an Australian billionaire, sued Meta in California in 2022 over the company’s alleged failure to tackle fraudulent adverts that deceive Australians into making bogus investments, allegedly circulating on Facebook using his name and image.
Given the claims, which include misuse of his image and unjust enrichment – as Meta earns money from advertising on its platform regardless of its purpose or outcome – Forrest’s lawsuit may be one of the most significant.
He is asking the court to rule that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act cannot be used by Meta as a defence in this case. Meta is claiming protection from Forrest’s claims under Section 230.
Enacted in 1996, Section 230, as it is commonly known, essentially grants platforms legal immunity from anything that happens on them. If the court rules in Forrest’s favour, it could turn decades of protection for online platforms on its head.
A Meta spokesperson declined to comment.